The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: xavier45 on October 15, 2009, 08:44:11 AM
-
On Monday's Jeopardy!, a contestant named Jeff Kirby was a contestant on the show. He didn't do very well and went home with the consolation prize of $1,000. Fine. Problem here is, he was once a contestant on the show back in 1999. The producers of the show say they had no clue about this. The people at the Jeopardy! (http://\"http://http://boards.sonypictures.com/boards/showthread.php?t=43174&page=3\") boards caught this quickly pointing at one thing the guy did the same. He wore the same tie on Monday that he wore on his initial appearance back in '99. So obviously, he will not be receiving that $1,000.
The producers made a statement about this. Here it is at Buzzerblog (http://\"http://buzzerblog.flashgameshows.com/jeopardy-contestant-from-1999-tricks-show-appeared-again-on-monday/\").
-
Well, at least "The Price is Right" can now say they're not the only show to have this kind of a problem happen.
-
Our post on it at About: Game Shows (http://\"http://gameshows.about.com/b/2009/10/14/jeopardy-brass-to-jeff-kirby-oooh-sorry.htm\") has a link to an interview he did with his local paper (http://\"http://www.santamariatimes.com/news/local/article_eaf5f660-7cc9-531f-9f0a-d99fb8f6dae9.html\") where he would have a clear opportunity to mention a past connection with the show and did not, so he was definitely trying to pull a fast one. As someone who works in education, it saddens me that Kirby is supposed to be the model and a person to look up to for elementary school kids.
-
Given the longevity of the program, you would think J! would maintain some kind of database of all past contestants and check it before each taping to see if someone is trying to "beat the system."
Could Mr. Kirby face legal action for fibbing on his application and legal forms?
JD
-
[quote name=\'colonial\' post=\'228551\' date=\'Oct 15 2009, 10:17 AM\']Could Mr. Kirby face legal action for fibbing on his application and legal forms?[/quote]He could, but Sony/Jeopardy probably doesn't want to go down that road. (They never sued a 5-time champ in the 80s who bounced around on game shows with various identities to skirt eligibity requirements.) Just take his money away and make sure he never comes the studio again.
-
[quote name=\'colonial\' post=\'228551\' date=\'Oct 15 2009, 10:17 AM\']Given the longevity of the program, you would think J! would maintain some kind of database of all past contestants and check it before each taping to see if someone is trying to "beat the system."
Could Mr. Kirby face legal action for fibbing on his application and legal forms?
JD[/quote]
Well, if people are truthful, the staff doesn't need a database. Even if they don't maintain such a database, the fans will let them know, and Sony thanks them for it. The guy had to give back the grand and is being publicly humiliated, so isn't that punishment enough?
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'228553\' date=\'Oct 15 2009, 09:30 AM\']Well, if people are truthful, the staff doesn't need a database. Even if they don't maintain such a database, the fans will let them know, and Sony thanks them for it.[/quote]
I think the consensus is that he shouldn't have been allowed to play in the first place, which (in this case) a database would have prevented.
-
Could Mr. Kirby face legal action for fibbing on his application and legal forms?
He could
In practice, no.
-
I'm loving the fact that in his two appearances a decade apart, he wore the same necktie. That could have been his own private way of thumbing his nose at the producers, it could have been oblivious coincidence, or it could have just shown that he has a spectacularly limited wardrobe.
-
I wonder if he wore anything else that was the same as last time...and if the garment(s) had ever been taken off.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'228553\' date=\'Oct 15 2009, 10:30 AM\']Well, if people are truthful, the staff doesn't need a database. Even if they don't maintain such a database, the fans will let them know, and Sony thanks them for it. The guy had to give back the grand and is being publicly humiliated, so isn't that punishment enough?[/quote]
People sign up for far worse humiliation all the time for the chance to be on TV.
There's really no excuse for the staff not to have a database.
-
[quote name=\'ChrisLambert!\' post=\'228600\' date=\'Oct 15 2009, 06:01 PM\']There's really no excuse for the staff not to have a database.[/quote]
Of course you're absolutely right and it amazes me that anyone would think otherwise. To suggest that a database wasn't really necessary as long as all contestant applicants were honest AND as long as the public did their duty as the corruption watchdogs for the production team and was sure to report any evildoers that managed to sneak past the producers at some point in the process...BUT...since this would be kinda a silly, naive and, might I add, rather foolish and dangerous, way to conduct business of any type, large or small, the answer is always as such...if you have a rule, requirement, guideline, etc. in place for any reason whatsoever. but especially in cases where this rule is considered to be one of the major conditions of your process, the only prudent thing to do is put SOMETHING...ANYTHING...in place that kinda works along in the background in an effort to provide assurance that, whenever possible, all rules and such in place are being followed and in cases where something goes wrong, either purposely or accidentally, those safeguards can easily alert the necessary parties that a situation has arisen that requires attention. Many many times for things like this, safeguards as simple and mundane as databases are relied upon and are often preferred since they can do so much and require so little time, effort or expense to maintain.
In this specific instance, how difficult would it have been for the contestant coordinators to have maintained a database consisting of just two items of information (contestant name and contestant SS#)? Then, either when screening all applicants or maybe even just the actual eventual chosen contestant pool, any name or SS# duplication would be discovered immediately, giving everyone involved ample opportunity to nip the problem in the bud and definitely not let something like this go as far as it did this time.
Just kinda seems like a big ole duhhhhhhh to me...
Jake
-
I was being somewhat facetious. Of course they should have a database of people who have appeared on the show, but unless there's been a complete turnover in coordinators, it's funny that nobody caught it except the game show geeks. Heck, maybe Alex or Johnny should have remembered the dude.
Of course, if the database was on 3x5 cards, who'd go to the trouble putting that stuff on computer?
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'228616\' date=\'Oct 15 2009, 07:22 PM\']Of course, if the database was on 3x5 cards, who'd go to the trouble putting that stuff on computer?[/quote]
Now, unless you were being somewhat facetious again here, I think we could agree that an actual proper database, especially considering the technical innovations that have come along since the show premiered in 1984, would never be on 3x5 cards. In fact, I don't think that tons of tons of 3x5 cards accumulated over the years could even be considered a database. That being said, if they did want to create a database using just the two contestant items I mentioned before and if the only place those items could be gotten from was tons of 3x5 cards, it would still be reasonably easy to do. There have been less than 5000 total contestants used during this series and, while perhaps tedious and truly boring as hell, so pulling together this information into one reliable location wouldn't take very long to do at all. Hell, I've gone through the nightmare of having to create extremely detailed databases that pulled together mind-boggling amounts and types of data and even the worst of them never was all that tough when all was said and done.
And even if it were freakin enormous amount of trouble to put this database together, well, that's just too bad since, trouble or not, it is needed to protect the show from making such preventable and careless mistakes in the future.
Jake
-
For that matter, you would think all those forms people filled out over the years would be in a file somewhere. Just the routine act of form filing should have pointed to a previous appearance.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'228628\' date=\'Oct 15 2009, 06:09 PM\']For that matter, you would think all those forms people filled out over the years would be in a file somewhere.[/quote]
As I said elsewhere, they must have something on file somewhere -- they were able to track down a bunch of past contestants for the Ultimate Tournament of Champions a few years ago, for example. I also assume they'd have to keep some data on file for the IRS and/or the California Franchise Tax Board.
Of course, a couple questions: how searchable is their file, and is it possible that they put one-and-done contestants in a different file (perhaps even the circular file) than those who are more likely to come back at some point?
-
[quote name=\'trainman\' post=\'228643\' date=\'Oct 15 2009, 10:38 PM\']Of course, a couple questions: how searchable is their file, and is it possible that they put one-and-done contestants in a different file (perhaps even the circular file) than those who are more likely to come back at some point?[/quote]
Speaking as a one-and-done, I'd have to think we're the group they'd be MORE concerned about having records for, because we'd be the ones they'd be less likely to remember, and we'd be more desirous to have our second chance than somebody who won a game or two.
Or 74. But I'm not bitter.
The only thing that makes any sense to me is that he gave them a fake SSN and they didn't bother to verify it.
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'228552\' date=\'Oct 15 2009, 07:23 AM\']He could, but Sony/Jeopardy probably doesn't want to go down that road. (They never sued a 5-time champ in the 80s who bounced around on game shows with various identities to skirt eligibity requirements.) Just take his money away and make sure he never comes the studio again.[/quote]In the instance you refer to, Jeopardy! was actually sued by the contestant in question. She won five games, and roughly $50,000, but the production company saw that she was ineligible. They withheld the money, she sued. Jeopardy! chose to pay her off rather than go to trial.
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'228553\' date=\'Oct 15 2009, 07:30 AM\']Well, if people are truthful, the staff doesn't need a database. Even if they don't maintain such a database, the fans will let them know, and Sony thanks them for it. The guy had to give back the grand and is being publicly humiliated, so isn't that punishment enough?[/quote]And laws aren't for law abiding citizens, are they? You put the rules in place to catch the bad guys, not to inconvenience the honest contestants?
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'228616\' date=\'Oct 15 2009, 05:22 PM\']Of course, if the database was on 3x5 cards, who'd go to the trouble putting that stuff on computer?[/quote]Did you actually put any thought into this? Data doesn't just enter itself. (Back when I began working at the Family Business, that's all I did: taking paper files and converting them into PDFs that can be printed or e-mailed to whoever needs them.)
-
Many years ago there was a contestant database which existed on microfiche. It and a microfiche reader lived backstage in studio 33 (for those familiar with backstage of 33 since it became the number-one tourist attraction for game show fans, it was in the room with the conference table in it). Prior to each TPIR taping, the S&P rep compared the list of prospective contestants given to him/her by the producer and the names/SSNs were checked against the database. The database contained contestant names from all game shows -- all three networks and syndication, New York and L.A. I have no idea whether they still use that database or whether it has been kept up to date. From this incident it would appear that they don't use it any more.
The primary purpose of S&P WRT game shows was to make sure the games weren't rigged in violation of federal law which could affect the renewal of a network-owned station's license. The network S&P reps were basically to guard against any practices which might put the station groups' licenses at risk. They were also there to enforce such policies as frequency of contestant appearances. A contestant appearing twice in 10 years isn't going to put a station's license at risk so they may not be as cautious about it any more. If they make contestants sign papers agreeing to policies such as frequency of appearances, it is a disincentive for contestants to break the rules and they have a basis for withholding a contestant's winnings. Regarding the woman who sued Jeopardy!, they may have figured it was cheaper to pay her than to litigate. I'm surprised the agreement doesn't say any disputes will go to binding arbitration rather than through the court system.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'228651\' date=\'Oct 16 2009, 01:44 AM\']Many years ago there was a contestant database which existed on microfiche. It and a microfiche reader lived backstage in studio 33 (for those familiar with backstage of 33 since it became the number-one tourist attraction for game show fans, it was in the room with the conference table in it). Prior to each TPIR taping, the S&P rep compared the list of prospective contestants given to him/her by the producer and the names/SSNs were checked against the database. The database contained contestant names from all game shows -- all three networks and syndication, New York and L.A. I have no idea whether they still use that database or whether it has been kept up to date. From this incident it would appear that they don't use it any more.[/quote]
In Vegas, they have a system similar to that in place that helps catch casino cheats, with everything on a database accessible by all casinos in town, and using face recognition technology. But does "Jeopardy!" need to go that far? Simple database. Social, name, date of last appearance, money won. You could do it in a couple of megs.
-
Just to attest that the system does work - someone I met at my Wheel tryout got on the show in '98, and she told me this:
Anyway, the game show lawyer re-appeared in the contestant prep room and tapped one of the contestants on the shoulder and told him he wanted to see him outside the room. This guy disappeared forever. We all found out later that he had appeared on Wheel of Fortune once in the 70's - and you are not allowed to appear twice.
Curiosity question though - I realize there is a database of previous appearances, but is that only limited to US shows?
Ryan
-
[quote name=\'vtown7\' post=\'228660\' date=\'Oct 16 2009, 07:34 AM\']Just to attest that the system does work - someone I met at my Wheel tryout got on the show in '98, and she told me this:
Anyway, the game show lawyer re-appeared in the contestant prep room and tapped one of the contestants on the shoulder and told him he wanted to see him outside the room. This guy disappeared forever.[/quote]
Holy crap, that seems a little harsh.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'228647\' date=\'Oct 15 2009, 11:35 PM\']The only thing that makes any sense to me is that he gave them a fake SSN and they didn't bother to verify it.[/quote]
I would say this is your winner. Or, the conspiracy theorist could say that they don't check anymore, and rely on the fanbois to do the policing.
--Mike
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'228590\' date=\'Oct 15 2009, 05:54 PM\']I'm loving the fact that in his two appearances a decade apart, he wore the same necktie. That could have been his own private way of thumbing his nose at the producers, it could have been oblivious coincidence, or it could have just shown that he has a spectacularly limited wardrobe.[/quote]
I'll take Door #3, Monty!!!!! :-)
Actually, when I read about this, it gave me chills. I cannot TELL you about how many times I've dreamed about being BACK on TPIR....after I've already BEEN on TPIR. In the dream, I know that I'm not supposed to be there, knowing that people are going to find out I was on before, but I'm winning so I kee my mouth shut, and etc etc etc.
I wonder if any of you who have been on a show have had simlalr experiences/dreams. This isn't a joke -- seriously, I've had this dream like 4 or 5 times, and each time I wake up going "WHEW!"
-Brent
-
If I were in charge, I would allow anyone who competed against Ken Jennings to be given another chance on the show.
-
[quote name=\'BrentW\' post=\'228672\' date=\'Oct 16 2009, 02:39 PM\']Actually, when I read about this, it gave me chills. I cannot TELL you about how many times I've dreamed about being BACK on TPIR....after I've already BEEN on TPIR. In the dream, I know that I'm not supposed to be there, knowing that people are going to find out I was on before, but I'm winning so I kee my mouth shut, and etc etc etc.[/quote]
TPIR is kind of the interesting twist on all this with the fairly new "can be on again after ten years" rule.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'228673\' date=\'Oct 16 2009, 01:44 PM\']If I were in charge, I would allow anyone who competed against Ken Jennings to be given another chance on the show.[/quote]
I'm sure at least one of our esteemed moderators would be happy with that...
-
[quote name=\'BrentW\' post=\'228672\' date=\'Oct 16 2009, 02:39 PM\']I wonder if any of you who have been on a show have had simlalr experiences/dreams. This isn't a joke -- seriously, I've had this dream like 4 or 5 times, and each time I wake up going "WHEW!"[/quote]
Did you have to face a gauntlet of villains?
-
It has worked well No contestant has ever tried to snooker us like this for 26 seasons; however, clearly, that system we didn't enforce our own rules and failed to detect that Mr. Kirby had appeared on the show in 1999.
In our contestant booking and verification process, we relied on information provided to us by Mr. Kirby were too lazy to check for any prior appearances by Mr. Kirby ourselves. He did not disclose that he had previously been on Jeopardy! and now we are making a half-assed attempt to shift the blame to him. Forgive us for being redundant: His having been on the show before made Mr. Kirby ineligible as a contestant and therefore ineligible to receive any prizes from the show.
Because Mr. Kirby came in third in the competition, this decision does not affect either of his opponents nor their winnings.
If Mr. Kirby had become champion on that episode we'd have even more egg on our faces than we do now.
Thank you to our watchful viewers for bringing this to our attention who know more about who has been on our show than we do.
The Jeopardy! Producers (who are too embarrassed to show their names in public)
Note to attorneys for Jeopardy! and Sony Pictures Television: the above post is a JOKE.
-
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'228674\' date=\'Oct 16 2009, 02:47 PM\'][quote name=\'BrentW\' post=\'228672\' date=\'Oct 16 2009, 02:39 PM\']Actually, when I read about this, it gave me chills. I cannot TELL you about how many times I've dreamed about being BACK on TPIR....after I've already BEEN on TPIR. In the dream, I know that I'm not supposed to be there, knowing that people are going to find out I was on before, but I'm winning so I kee my mouth shut, and etc etc etc.[/quote]
TPIR is kind of the interesting twist on all this with the fairly new "can be on again after ten years" rule.
[/quote]
My MOTHER of all people said this, but I didn't believe her. Are you serious? You can be selected as a contestant AGAIN after 10 years? Can someone confirm this (not that I don't believe TPIRFAN28, but I just want to have it confirmed.
THANK YOU!
Brent
-
[quote name=\'BrentW\' post=\'228708\' date=\'Oct 16 2009, 10:37 PM\']My MOTHER of all people said this, but I didn't believe her. Are you serious? You can be selected as a contestant AGAIN after 10 years? Can someone confirm this (not that I don't believe TPIRFAN28, but I just want to have it confirmed.[/quote]
Yes. The rules were changed in November of 2007.
-
[quote name=\'chad1m\' post=\'228552\' date=\'Oct 15 2009, 10:23 AM\']They never sued a 5-time champ in the 80s who bounced around on game shows with various identities to skirt eligibity requirements.[/quote]
Ah, yes, "Barbara Lowe". The stuck-up little whore. How I hate her.
-
Simple database. Social, name, date of last appearance, money won. You could do it in a couple of megs.
A bit *too* simple; there are legitimate reasons for getting a new SSN, and some names are very common.
-
[quote name=\'HYHYBT\' post=\'228794\' date=\'Oct 18 2009, 01:55 PM\']
Simple database. Social, name, date of last appearance, money won. You could do it in a couple of megs.
A bit *too* simple; there are legitimate reasons for getting a new SSN, and some names are very common.
[/quote]
Throw DOB on top of that and a match will raise enough of a flag to warrant further investigation whilst adding precisely sixteen bits per record.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'228796\' date=\'Oct 18 2009, 04:14 PM\'][quote name=\'HYHYBT\' post=\'228794\' date=\'Oct 18 2009, 01:55 PM\']
Simple database. Social, name, date of last appearance, money won. You could do it in a couple of megs.
A bit *too* simple; there are legitimate reasons for getting a new SSN, and some names are very common.
[/quote]
Throw DOB on top of that and a match will raise enough of a flag to warrant further investigation whilst adding precisely sixteen bits per record.
[/quote]
I'd say Name, DOB and SSN would suffice. It apparently works for blood donation centers. My sister recently gave blood at her high school blood drive and two days later when they entered her info and started processing her blood, the computer red flagged her and her blood because she had the same first name and DOB AND blood type to someone who lived in a town 5 miles away (Weird coincidence? I know.). They called to verify that she wasn't donating under a different last name, but if they can red flag a person that easily, Jeopardy should be able to do the same.
-
[quote name=\'ten96lt\' post=\'228813\' date=\'Oct 19 2009, 12:17 AM\']I'd say Name, DOB and SSN would suffice. It apparently works for blood donation centers.[/quote]
I used to work in a data warehouse environment for a major health insurance company, and this was the standard for matching membership and claims data.