Shows like "MILLIONAIRE" while millions STARVE or are UNEMPLOYED

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 4:37 PM GMT
    Just a thought about how we operate in the country. TV on in the background (it's going off after I type this), and it's apparently the 10th year of the show Millionaire. When you look at this it says a lot about what's gone wrong in this country. Why are networks offering millions to individuals (more money than one person needs) when they could figure out a way to get it to the people who really need it? It is a give-a-way, so other than knowledge and luck, the people really aren't working for it.

    One show I liked temporarily replaced "Extreme Homes" and was about well-off, successful individuals who sought out and donated to organizations that helped the less fortunate. That was a better way to help.

    Your thoughts?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 4:54 PM GMT
    wrestlervic saidYour thoughts?
    A million bucks wouldn't even put a down payment on my dream plane. icon_lol.gif
    But then again, if I had that much money I definitely be using a lot of it to help others (not by donations - but by direct help which includes money and time).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 5:03 PM GMT
    paulflexes said
    wrestlervic saidYour thoughts?
    A million bucks wouldn't even put a down payment on my dream plane. icon_lol.gif
    But then again, if I had that much money I definitely be using a lot of it to help others (not by donations - but by direct help which includes money and time).


    I second the "by direct help." Though I've given to Red Cross, etc, I want to make sure every dollar I donate helps. Too much cheating and stealing.
  • Lincsbear

    Posts: 2603

    Sep 05, 2011 5:11 PM GMT
    Television is a business with a bottom line: ratings (and profits).It`s trying to keep the advertisers happy.Entertainment sells.It seems more interested in extremes or unusual or freakish individuals.
    A similar programme airs on British television about wealthy private philanthropy from someone who was once poor,but it isn`t a big success (ratings).
    I also have doubts about the motivations of those involved in such shows to keep the 'entertainment' value up.
  • mizu5

    Posts: 2599

    Sep 05, 2011 5:35 PM GMT
    Having it keeps all those working on it employed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 6:15 PM GMT
    Exactly, and it does help people. There are several persons that work on this show, and provides them with an honest living.

    And this is also a good show because unlike bullshit like Jersey Show, people that are watching it are learning something and seeing if they can recall something they may have learned in life or in school. The same way with Jeopardy. Intellectual game shows should stay on the air.

    As for helping others less fortunate, there are these accomplishments:

    During a week of episodes in November 2007, to celebrate the 1,000th episode of the syndicated Millionaire, all contestants that week started with $1,000 so that they could not leave empty-handed, and only had to answer ten questions to win $1,000,000. During that week, twenty home viewers per day also won $1,000 each.

    And

    "Various special editions and tournaments have been conducted which feature celebrities playing the game and donating winnings to charities of their choice."
  • DCEric

    Posts: 3713

    Sep 05, 2011 6:18 PM GMT
    mizu5 saidHaving it keeps all those working on it employed.

    +1

    /a disturbing number of donations are made by people who win such shows when they realize they are going to loose 50% of it to taxes.
  • MSUBioNerd

    Posts: 1813

    Sep 05, 2011 6:24 PM GMT
    Game shows, despite the large payouts possible, are some of the least expensive shows for television channels to produce. They don't have extensive sets and wardrobes. The host is generally paid a nice salary, but total salary costs are far below what a drama or a comedy would entail. Shows which give away non-cash prizes often have them donated by the company which makes them, as the company therefore gets advertising *during the program*, not even in the ad slots. And of course, the television company can still run ads, and such shows are often wildly popular among audiences. Even production and filming costs and the like are low, as you've got a single location and don't need to edit together a narrative -- you film people playing a game, interspersed with shots of the audience cheering, and take breaks for commercials.

    Simply giving the prize away to needy people would a) attract fewer viewers, and b) increase costs (eg, finding the needy people, editing a narrative, traveling to location, etc). You'd lower revenue while increasing costs. There is essentially no incentive for any corporation to do those things.

  • danisnotstr8

    Posts: 2579

    Sep 05, 2011 6:25 PM GMT
    I'm not so concerned about this.

    What bothers me is that the people who run the networks, in addition to all of our big business people who hoard money like it's going out of style, not to mention the banks and the pigs who run them, have 95% of the money in this country. Meanwhile, 95% of the people in this country share the 5% that's left after Exxon walks away tax-burden free.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 6:26 PM GMT
    I can guarantee you that many of these charity donations are buying yachts and vacation homes for those who run those charities.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 6:27 PM GMT
    Don't forget that those shows also keep plenty of people employed in the TV industry, while also bringing in promotional advertising that helps other businesses gain revenue, which keeps many more employed and services offered.

    And it's not like these shows just have banks of money waiting to be given away. I don't believe it's that simple. They earn it through advertising revenues and syndications. If there was no show, there would be much less money available to just "give" to the needy. At the same time, companies pay for the advertising slots through revenues gained through the promotion.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 6:29 PM GMT
    EastCoastNAZ saidDon't forget that those shows also keep plenty of people employed in the TV industry, while also bringing in promotional advertising that helps other businesses gain revenue, which keeps many more employed and services offered.

    And it's not like these shows just have banks of money waiting to be given away. I don't believe it's that simple. They earn it through advertising revenues and syndications. If there was no show, there would be much less money available to just "give" to the needy. At the same time, companies pay for the advertising slots through revenues gained through the promotion.


    Um.......people in the television industry can still be employed making better programs. These programs create personal fortunes for the producers, distributors, advertisers, and the winners. You can say and "hope" that those advertisers and corporations are helping out the real poor with donations, but I believe better programs can be made that directly help those people.
  • dancedancekj

    Posts: 1761

    Sep 05, 2011 6:34 PM GMT
    The real crime is that shows like these attract millions of viewers, while shows of more substance do not. If I wanted to watch some average Joe try and answer questions about basic knowledge, or some bimbo in her home talking about her drama, or idiotic hedonistic young adults being jackasses, I'd find a real life example.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 6:43 PM GMT
    God I hope I don't get bitched for this

    I'm all for helping people. I spend a lot of my time volunteering with friends at homeless shelters and even chose to switch to a different military occupation specialty so that I can gain more experience in humanitarian work and community development because I'd love to assist a non profit or even make a career of helping make a difference in the detroit area.

    At the same time, I don't think anyone owes the poor. Sure I would like to help the poor and I go out of my way to do it, but If I stumbled on something that ended up making me a shit ton of money I don't see why I should be expected to spend that money on people that I don't even know.

    People starving sucks; people homeless sucks; people suffering sucks, and I hate it, but its not the problem of people who make these shows. Its not the problem of millionaires. Its just not their problem.

    And lets not forget that many of these shows prevent people from being unemployed. A lot of work goes into making them and even the advertisers get their name out there making it easier for them to make money and be able to pay their employees as well.

    I understand the dissapointment, I feel it too sometimes, but people shouldn't be expected to fix social and economic problems that they didn't cause. Unless they get paid to do so.

  • Celticmusl

    Posts: 4330

    Sep 05, 2011 6:45 PM GMT
    Unless these shows are steeling from the poor to pay for the millions of dollars, I don't mind them at all. Sadly, when the economy is bad the general population do turn to images and fantasies of wealth and leisure. It's an understood escapism.

    That's why trillions of lotto tickets are sold every year. Just a buck can give you the hope and fantasy of being rich beyond your wildest dreams.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 6:56 PM GMT
    Yea and then you have shows like "secret millionaire" and "undercover boss", talk about clueless people..
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 7:07 PM GMT
    wrestlervic said
    EastCoastNAZ saidDon't forget that those shows also keep plenty of people employed in the TV industry, while also bringing in promotional advertising that helps other businesses gain revenue, which keeps many more employed and services offered.

    And it's not like these shows just have banks of money waiting to be given away. I don't believe it's that simple. They earn it through advertising revenues and syndications. If there was no show, there would be much less money available to just "give" to the needy. At the same time, companies pay for the advertising slots through revenues gained through the promotion.


    Um.......people in the television industry can still be employed making better programs. These programs create personal fortunes for the producers, distributors, advertisers, and the winners. You can say and "hope" that those advertisers and corporations are helping out the real poor with donations, but I believe better programs can be made that directly help those people.


    Um, clearly you don't understand why the entertainment industry exists. It allows people to escape and be entertained, away from daily stresses, etc. If every show on TV was about charities and helping people, there would be a very small viewing audience, therefore, no one would want to advertise on them. Therefore, there would be no revenues to be able to give to anyone.
    How depressing would it be if every show was basically a stylized telethon? Why do we have athletes earning gazillions of dollars instead of just getting everyone in a stadium to have a charity event? Our society doesn't work that way and it can't work that way. People need to that release from their daily realities.

    At the same time, is it really every person's obligation to help others in need? Do you live at the ultimate minimum and give all your excess to the poor? Didn't think so. Somewhat to Halfstep's point, I work hard for my money, doesn't matter what industry I am in (unless it is illegal and/or unethical, of course), and I deserve to live with the luxuries that I have. I am keeping others employed and earning a salary. As a matter of fact, I am responsible for keeping hundreds and hundreds of people employed through my current responsibility. Why don't I deserve it? I give to those that need help on a consistent basis.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 7:20 PM GMT
    DoomsDayAlpaca saidYea and then you have shows like "secret millionaire" and "undercover boss", talk about clueless people..


    You see, "Secret Millionaire" was a good show; it's the one I referenced in the first post. I just forgot the name. They made the public aware of organizations that help people, and the people they help. So not only do you see them give money from their fortunes, but viewers probably donate too, and people find out about these organizations exist.

    I LOL'd when someone mentioned Millionaire giving out $1000 to everyone in the audience or whatever. Those aren't needy people. They bought plane tickets and got onto the show in between their tours of Disney, etc.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 7:26 PM GMT
    Celticmusl saidUnless these shows are steeling from the poor to pay for the millions of dollars, I don't mind them at all. Sadly, when the economy is bad the general population do turn to images and fantasies of wealth and leisure. It's an understood escapism.

    That's why trillions of lotto tickets are sold every year. Just a buck can give you the hope and fantasy of being rich beyond your wildest dreams.


    Well, they are stealing from the poor. Same as lottery tickets. They use people's false hopes of escapism and making a fortune to buy tickets, and pay cable companies, and buy advertiser's product. They prey on the least common denominator.

    Instead of backing shows like Millionaire, maybe some of you can think of better programming that is both entertaining and helpful.
  • CoreyA1

    Posts: 23

    Sep 05, 2011 7:49 PM GMT
    nice post
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Sep 05, 2011 7:57 PM GMT
    wrestlervic saidThey use people's false hopes of escapism and making a fortune to buy tickets, and pay cable companies, and buy advertiser's product. They prey on the least common denominator.

    Instead of backing shows like Millionaire, maybe some of you can think of better programming that is both entertaining and helpful.



    No one is putting a gun to anyone's head to watch these shows, or buy these products. It's called "entertainment", and people of all walks of life and economic backgrounds like to escape to whatever entertains them. We have many choices when it comes to being entertained...don't really see that as a bad thing. No one ever said ALL entertainment had to be deemed as "quality entertainment" to everybody.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 8:30 PM GMT
    Help the poor?

    Tax breaks for people and corporations that contribute to programs that "teach the (poor) how to fish".

    And reduce gov't spending on useless foreign wars meant to contain rogue powers that probably have nukes and other WMDs already.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 8:34 PM GMT
    dancedancekj saidThe real crime is that shows like these attract millions of viewers, while shows of more substance do not. If I wanted to watch some average Joe try and answer questions about basic knowledge, or some bimbo in her home talking about her drama, or idiotic hedonistic young adults being jackasses, I'd find a real life example.


    You know it brother. I wish they had a show that tortured and maimed the producer's of those kinds of shows, along with call-in polls on how you'd like them to suffer. Now THAT I'd watch. At least until they were gone. icon_smile.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 10:39 PM GMT
    If I had a million or two, I'd use it to build a school or an AIDS clinic or use to help fight crime or set up drug rehab clinics.

    I agree shows like ' Who wants to be a Millionaire' (the millions of starving people; that's who) should be taken off the air - it's very inappropriate, even for me as I'm unemployed.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 05, 2011 10:40 PM GMT
    wrestlervic said
    dancedancekj saidThe real crime is that shows like these attract millions of viewers, while shows of more substance do not. If I wanted to watch some average Joe try and answer questions about basic knowledge, or some bimbo in her home talking about her drama, or idiotic hedonistic young adults being jackasses, I'd find a real life example.


    You know it brother. I wish they had a show that tortured and maimed the producer's of those kinds of shows, along with call-in polls on how you'd like them to suffer. Now THAT I'd watch. At least until they were gone. icon_smile.gif



    HAHAHAHA! That made me laugh! icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif Not in a sarcastic way, it really made me laugh.