OK so the big news today is that I was trawling through GSNN and found a contestant call for something that sounds awfully like a US pilot for The Genius for a cable network. We don’t know if that’s what it is though, so let’s not get overexcited just yet.
In other news, Buzzerblog has the skinny on Who Gets Nothing, where contestants have to decide between them who gets what from ten unequal amounts of cash, the lowest of which is zero and the highest as much as £500,000. This sort of thing has failed to be successful in the past (Unanonemous and Divided both very much non-hits basically everywhere, but they did sell to a lot of places and both shows whilst not perfect weren’t completely awful either) so I don’t really see why it would suddenly start being successful in the future. You might still be able to be in the pilot if you want, although seeing as you won’t be playing for actual money (you’ll be paid a fee) I’m not completely certain what the point is.
In other news, Fort Boyard Ultimate Challenge is nominated for a kids BAFTA in the entertainment category up against Junior Bake Off, Hacker Time and Swashbuckle. Commercial TV for the win!!!! It’s a shame they can’t seem to decide how many series the show has had though.
Other BAFTA Childrens’ nominations include Ludus in the Interactive category (obvs), and Iain Stirling for The Dog Ate My Homework.
But yes. Fort Boyard for the entertainment, and DNN for the comedy.
Unexpected french news : M6 is going to adapt Saturday Night Takeaway before the end of the year !
Some Utopia USA news- they’re changing the online voting procedure. Now instead of the people in the compound nominating two people for eviction and the home audience nominating the 3rd, the home audience is now going to vote for all three eviction nominees (eviction vote is still the same- the 12 non-nominated Utopia people vote to see who goes; if there’s a tie, the person we nominated involved in the tie who got the most votes from us goes). There’s also a audience vote for “biggest contributor” in the group- that person will get a reward the audience picks and plus will be immune from the next nomination vote.
Regarding formats like Who Gets Nothing, I think the common primary flaw in every attempt at such a format is simply that the penalty for not backing down ranges from nonexistent to a slap on the wrist compared to the potential reward. Likewise for the Prisoner’s Dilemma endgame — the only incentive anyone has to cooperate/share/split is to not look like a jerk on national TV. And it’s a well-established fact that plenty of people would be more than willing to completely humiliate themselves and ruin their reputation on TV for a hundred grand.
Which makes me wonder if Divided could have been improved drastically with the addition of Gaki no Tsukai’s Chinko Machine placed under the desk, to be triggered as a forfeit on anyone who sticks to A until the bitter end.
The problem I had with Divided was that if you were cast on a show with someone whose tactic was “no surrender”, and clearly several people were cast that way, the previous 30 minutes was pointless.
Agreed, and I’d like to add that the same goes for most Prisoner’s Dilemma endgames as well. If both players defect/steal, the entire game has been for naught. I also considered it the one massive glaring flaw in The Million Pound Drop prior to the introduction of Double or Nothing, since getting Q8 wrong renders the entire game moot, and anyone getting that far with six figures remaining would inevitably get a question so ridiculously arcane that nobody could possibly be expected to know it. The game basically degenerated into Million Pound Heads or Tails at that point.
I think I’ve come up with an earnest way to improve Divided though: Each player picks their initial share in secret, and the votes are revealed before they take turns explaining why they feel they deserve the share. At any time (including when the votes are first revealed), if exactly 2 players are on the same share, the 3rd player may individually lock in their share and secure its current value. I imagine this would change the division round from a matter of greed and avarice to a matter of risk versus reward. And the secret ballot would turn the initial choice into a much more interesting game theory problem — obviously A has the highest reward, but it’s also most likely to be contested. But if you pick B or C, it’s possible another player will think the same way, leaving A wide open for the third player to take. (There might be a need for a cooldown of 3 seconds or so after switching before you can lock individually, to prevent the game from degenerating into a race to hit the button in the event nobody picks A initially.)
I really don’t know if we’re in the collective mood for something like this.
I think we’ve long moved past the set of shows starting with Weakest Link, going through Golden Balls/Divided/”Nasty” Big Brother, where cruelty to and between contestants was seen as a virtue. I think the last vestiges of this are perhaps seen in The Apprentice. I think it’s why Strictly seems to be continually on the up and X Factor seems to be on the way down, it’s why Bake Off hits the heights that it does, and it’s why Pointless and The Chase are doing the ridiculous numbers they are – there’s barely a cruel bone in Pointless at all, and where contestants are crushed on The Chase, it’s done with humour, good grace, and through great skill rather than some other contestant deciding to get in the way.
Perhaps this is a move by Channel 4 to seem distinctive compared to the other evening quiz offerings. Fair enough – it’s good that they’re trying, I guess. But it seems to me that it’s out of step with the public mood.
From the description, it also doesn’t seem sure whether it’s a dream-fulfilling show or a dream-crushing show. I suspect, in practice, it’ll be the latter. Perhaps with ten contestants you’ll find someone more willing to take zero, but that leaves plenty of room for difficult contestants and stubborn disagreements that torpedo the whole thing, and with the prize budget they’re suggesting, it seems unlikely that they’re planning for too many winners.
I’m sure Mr Weaver will have some thoughts on the topic. I’m personally still hoping for Channel 4 to have a win in the game show arena, and indeed that Steve Jones will suddenly win through and have a good show, but I don’t think this is it.
This concludes this week’s edition of “Slagging Off Shows Before They’re Even Piloted”; The One Show is up next.