On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 1:42 AM, Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:48 PM, PGage <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Is it suggesting that Storage Wars is a game show, and salting the >> lockers is the equivalent of providing contestants with answers, in >> violation of the changes to the Communications Act after the Quiz Show >> scandals? >> >> If it is, are their implications in this law suit for other so-called >> reality shows, where the viewer is at least superficially led to believe >> that the action is "real" even though it is heavily contrived by the >> producers? >> >> Of course they are all staged, prompted, or rigged to varying degrees. > "Reality" shows are not about presenting a realistic show; they are about > presenting a show that will make money.... > > TV isn't real. It has never been real. It is the quantum physics concept > of the observer altering the test played and replayed over and over. Is the > subtle and not-so-subtle manipulation grounds for a lawsuit? Probably, but > I contend anybody appearing on a TV show expecting reality is too f-ing > stupid to be awarded through any real system of justice. > Yes. While I have never watched it, I do assume that there is something less that real about the Real Housewives from Beverly Hills (or whatever that show is called). But my point is, there is nothing illegal about a show like the West Wing, or The Sopranos, which are realistic depictions of fictional universes, presumably because the audience is expected to know they are fictional It is illegal to televise a game show in which a prize is awarded for contestant knowledge or skill if the producers have provided one or more contestants with some kind of advantage. It was not always against the law to do this - the people behind the 1950s quiz show scandals were not guilty of any crime at the time (though some of them did subsequently commit crimes by lying to criminal investigators or otherwise obstructing justice). However, in the wake of that scandal, congress specifically modified the Communications Act in 1960 to make rigging of game shows illegal. Hester's suit seems to be based on the claim that Storage Wars is a game show, and that seeding the lockers with treasures (especially if, as he claims, the producers starting doing that selectively, for some of the "players" but not him, after he complained) is the same as providing contestants on a game show with answers. I am seeking confirmation if this is the basis for his claim, and if it is, do people see this as a valid claim? I actually do watch Storage Wars, and have always thought I would enjoy it more without the inevitable "What the hell is this?" moment, followed by interminable commercials, half the time paying off with the discovery of a $1500 collectable Civil War bayonet in near mint condition found in a green hefty bag at the bottom of some maggot infested locker that the owner lost to auction because he could not pay the $20.00/month rent. But just because I would enjoy it more, I don't think that really means the show is constituting a fraud on me. Not only should I and other viewers be sophisticated enough to know that some kind of seeing is likely going on, but I am not sure that Storage Wars fits any reasonable definition of a TV game show (even granting the well-known difficulty in defining a game). Even though the show does end with something like a scoreboard, showing who "made" the most money, nobody wins any extra prize for finishing first, and the money they are represented as winning is depicted as coming from the potential re-sale of the items they purchased with their own money. I have not actually slowed down the credits to read the fine print, but I have always assumed that the main bidders get paid for being on the show - perhaps even are given additional cash to use at the auction. But it seems that it can't be illegal to pay people to be on a television show, so I am not sure how the Communications Act comes into play here, if indeed that is the claim that Hester is making. What I have wondered is the fairness to other, non-cast member bidders who show up at the auctions. I think I would be irritated if I was just a regular guy trying to buy some second hand wholesale merchandize at what is advertised as a general auction, only to find that 4 of the bidders are paid tv performers - you would essentially be bidding against shills. -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
