The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: Matt Ottinger on May 04, 2012, 12:15:16 PM
-
For one thing, I didn't realize the National Enquirer still existed anymore.
Secondly, they don't appear to have changed much (http://"http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/it-true-what-theyre-saying-about-alex-trebek").
-
Anyway, this is simple to do, especially when they are on the same sheet (I've done it hosting my work's annual Jeopardy! tournament). At the last taping of Jeopardy! I went to, Alex flubbed about 5-10 clues, that were just picked up again in post.
I don't think it's anything to worry about. Typical tabloid stuff.
//Wait, doesn't Alex always read the answers?
-
Yeah, but this time (read: once out of ~10,000 times this season), he read the answer before anyone buzzed in.
-
I think I puked a little into my mouth knowing that someone was actually paid to write that. I am surprised that even one paragraph has any information: the 4th to last paragraph, which was sourced from Wikipedia.
If you are going to make this "stuff" up (not to offend those who sell a fine fertilizer product sourced from male cattle), at least call the producers and his agent and get the "no comment" or a denial on the record and add some sizzle of a cover-up.
-
a fine fertilizer product sourced from male cattle
Bullshit? Is it bullshit?
-
a fine fertilizer product sourced from male cattle
Bullshit? Is it bullshit?
Correct. Select again.
-
Oooh, sorry. "What is 'bullshit'?" Remember that we are in Double Jeopardy. Select again.
-
I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss here...Fox News Sunday apparently is going to feature Alex this week and he said to Chris Wallace that he's considering stepping down at the end of the year but is torn about it.
-
...Fox News Sunday apparently is going to feature Alex this week and he said to Chris Wallace that he's considering stepping down at the end of the year but is torn about it.
Translation: He wants a raise.
-
I think I puked a little into my mouth knowing that someone was actually paid to write that.
Believe it or not, the writer DOES get paid to write stories like that.
The Enquirer was correct when they wrote months before Regis acknowledged that he was "moving on" that he was leaving his show. They also got the John Edwards story correct before the mainstream media picked up on it. Playboy had a nice piece about this in a past issue.
Let's see what Alex has to say on Fox News Sunday before dismissing this article from the Enquirer.
-
They didn't get the story about Morgan Freeman having an affair with his step-granddaughter right, however, as they both recently denied it.
-
They didn't get the story about Morgan Freeman having an affair with his step-granddaughter right, however, as they both recently denied it.
Not to unduly besmirch the good name of a fine actor, but liars tend to lie to cover up their lies.
/First I had heard about this affair.
-
The Enquirer was correct when they wrote months before Regis acknowledged that he was "moving on" that he was leaving his show. They also got the John Edwards story correct before the mainstream media picked up on it. Playboy had a nice piece about this in a past issue.
Yeah, well I can also write that Drew Carey is going to leave Price. He will do it at some point, but just because I pull a prediction out of my ass doesn't make it more credible. Junk journalism is junk journalism.
-
In the Fox News Sunday piece (http://"http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-news-sunday/index.html#/v/1624780062001/power-player-of-the-week-alex-trebek/?playlist_id=86913"), Trebek actually says that he's considering retiring in two years after the 30th season. As he put it, "Put in your 30, and go help people."
-
In the Fox News Sunday piece (http://"http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-news-sunday/index.html#/v/1624780062001/power-player-of-the-week-alex-trebek/?playlist_id=86913"), Trebek actually says that he's considering retiring in two years after the 30th season. As he put it, "Put in your 30, and go help people."
Well put. Why not go out after another big number?
-
Well put. Why not go out after another big number?
Because that particular round number has significance as it is traditionally the amount of time that qualifies one for a full pension.
-
Well put. Why not go out after another big number?
Because that particular round number has significance as it is traditionally the amount of time that qualifies one for a full pension.
That was a rhetorical question.
-
Well put. Why not go out after another big number?
Because that particular round number has significance as it is traditionally the amount of time that qualifies one for a full pension.
That was a rhetorical question.
Coulda fooled me.
-
Here's my personal rule of thumb: If it is on the cover of the Enquirer, I automatically write it off as being patently untrue.
-
Here's my personal rule of thumb: If it is on the cover of the Enquirer, I automatically write it off as being patently untrue.
Well, it's a shame that you're cutting corners in that way, because they've hit the nail on the head on stories they have broken (c.f. O.J. Simpson's book "If I Did It", Rush Limbaugh's addiction to painkillers, John Edwards' infidelity) more than once.
-
Here's my personal rule of thumb: If it is on the cover of the Enquirer, I automatically write it off as being patently untrue.
Well, it's a shame that you're cutting corners in that way, because they've hit the nail on the head on stories they have broken (c.f. O.J. Simpson's book "If I Did It", Rush Limbaugh's addiction to painkillers, John Edwards' infidelity) more than once.
I guess I may have to reevaluate that line of thought...
-
Here's my personal rule of thumb: If it is on the cover of the Enquirer, I automatically write it off as being patently untrue.
Well, it's a shame that you're cutting corners in that way, because they've hit the nail on the head on stories they have broken (c.f. O.J. Simpson's book "If I Did It", Rush Limbaugh's addiction to painkillers, John Edwards' infidelity) more than once.
Yeah. The story reads to me like Tabloid Journalism 101. Take something you can prove (game show host flubs question), add filler (aging game show host with history of heart disease flubs question), turn it into a question so that you can say you didn't actually claim anything that isn't true (Is Alex Trebek losing it?).
-
Add to it the reliance on an "anonymous source," which, depending on what state you are in, would be shielded from being identified in a court of law. Knowing that, a journalist can shortcut the process to fabricate the source to advance the story.
Hell, there isn't even any verification of the blooper happening in the first place. (Pssst! The evidence is that the gaffe is edited from the show.)
Thus, the tabloider takes a rumor, never calls/e-mails/faxes/tweets/IMs/texts/passengerpigeons anyone for a statement/corroboration/denial, creates a source to speak through, cranks out a story (literally, a story) in less than 10 minutes, and probably has his check direct deposited so that he never has to leave his windowless basement through the whole process.
-
Add to it the reliance on an "anonymous source," which, depending on what state you are in, would be shielded from being identified in a court of law. Knowing that, a journalist can shortcut the process to fabricate the source to advance the story.
Hell, there isn't even any verification of the blooper happening in the first place. (Pssst! The evidence is that the gaffe is edited from the show.)
Thus, the tabloider takes a rumor, never calls/e-mails/faxes/tweets/IMs/texts/passengerpigeons anyone for a statement/corroboration/denial, creates a source to speak through, cranks out a story (literally, a story) in less than 10 minutes, and probably has his check direct deposited so that he never has to leave his windowless basement through the whole process.
That is different from Wikipedia how?
-
That is different from Wikipedia how?
People aren't getting paid to write Wikipedia articles, and people aren't paying to read them. 0/10.
-
That is different from Wikipedia how?
People aren't getting paid to write Wikipedia articles, and people aren't paying to read them. 0/10.
But a lot of the time there is as much truth in a Wikipedia article as there is in a tabloid article... so points to both Jimmy and otmshank, I say!
-
But a lot of the time there is as much truth in a Wikipedia article as there is in a tabloid article... so points to both Jimmy and otmshank, I say!
Yes, you certainly do.
/wow
-
That is different from Wikipedia how?
People aren't getting paid to write Wikipedia articles, and people aren't paying to read them. 0/10.
But a lot of the time there is as much truth in a Wikipedia article as there is in a tabloid article... so points to both Jimmy and otmshank, I say!
References section is your friend.
-
Hell, there isn't even any verification of the blooper happening in the first place. (Pssst! The evidence is that the gaffe is edited from the show.)
Pssst! There was a studio full of witnesses.
-
If Trebek retires, they could always get this guy:
http://starsmedia.ign.com/stars/image/article/855/855738/will-ferrell-20080228035451742.jpg
-
Wow, that was a walk for a short dive. Holy.
-
If Trebek retires, they could always get this guy:
http://starsmedia.ign.com/stars/image/article/855/855738/will-ferrell-20080228035451742.jpg
Hur Hur. Oh no you didn't!
-
If Trebek retires, they could always get this guy:
http://starsmedia.ign.com/stars/image/article/855/855738/will-ferrell-20080228035451742.jpg
Okay, who traded chrisholland's password for gslover's?
-
*Sigh*
It was a joke.
-
*Sigh*
It was a joke.
We know.