Saturday, January 09, 2010

The Bachelor: where the roses don't smell as sweet.

UPDATE, Wednesday, January 13: And now we have Pavelka whining to People about how "this is the first time I've been cheated on...."

=========================

If you own a TV set, you know by now that this season's eponymousy star of The Bachelor, hunky pilot Jake Pavelka, and the execs behind the show have their shorts all bunched up because one of Jake's prospective fiancees, sexy Rozyln Papa, apparently had a fling with one of the show's producers while filming was underway.
To quote Entertainment Tonight's Kevin Frazier, "the betrayal hit [Jake] hard." He was "hurt."

Let me get this straight: In a show in which...

(1) a man gets to cavort with 25 carefully picked young women, all of whom
(2) will fawn over him and compete
zealously for him, and many of whom
(3) will eventually profess to love him (just as he will profess to have various levels of feeling for them), and a few of whom
(4) will even go on "overnights" with him as he narrows his options late in the series (because, after all, a guy's gotta test-drive the best cars on the lot before he makes his final decision)...

...we are supposed to think it's a serious impropriety and, some of the coverage would imply, a major moral transgression for one of the women to have an unscripted moment with one member of the show's staff? (And your host shall now segue into his usual, mind-numbing series of rhetorical questions.) Not only that, but we're supposed to take the show's title character seriously when he says he's hurt by the fact that he now has just 24 adoring and totally loyal lovelies to pick from instead of the original 25? Or that he feels betrayed because one of the women had the audacity to give another man her body before he had a chance to give her some stupid rose?
I think maybe our boy Jake needs to sit down with Elizabeth Edwards and learn a bit more about the meaning of "betrayal."

Yeah, I know all about reality TV; some of you may recall our late-2008 flap over Momma's Boys and Megan Albertus. Even so, how do grown-up women watch this show and not barf constantly? OK, so it's just "entertainment," but what's the message here? I don't care how hot Jake is, how can mothers even consider having the show on while their young daughters are in the room?
(And where is Gloria Allred when you really need her?)

Speaking of Gloria Allred, the producer was fired. Now, I'm guessing that all males attached to the show are required to sign a no-sampling agreement
to paraphrase a former boss of mine, "Thou shalt not put thy rod in thy staff." No matter. I still think the guy may have a claim of some sort for wrongful termination. Stay tuned. Or on second thought, don't bother.

27 comments:

Markus said...

Forget The Bachelor, what's happening with James Arthur Ray and his death tents?

Steve Salerno said...

Markus: I'll have an update on that for you in due course...there are certain things I've learned...however, because of other things that are going on behind the scenes (having in part to do with that "very good thing" to which I alluded a few months back), I'm going to be relatively quiet on that topic for a while. In the meantime, let's face it, it's almost hard to avoid news about James Ray in the mainstream media. Believe me, I'm not blowing off your question, and I'm sorry if I sound as if I'm being purposely mysterious; as I said, I have my reasons, and if all goes well, you'll know the whole story soon enough.

Now, if your comment is intended more as a wider critique of my posts on "frilly" subjects that have to do with pop culture (i.e. instead of focusing on my core issue, which is self-help)... What can I say? I've always reserved the right to go off on tangents when I felt they were appropriate and indicative of one of the "shames" of modern life--as noted in the subtitle of the blog itself.

roger o'keefe said...

Steve, I was just about to make a comment when I read the one by Markus. I have to say I agree with him. These topics are beneath you. I sometimes get the feeling that you dabble in them in order to win a few extra "ratings points" here and there. That being said, I can't imagine why anyone would taste their time watching nonsense like The Bachelor. To me that show personifies just about everything that's wrong with American culture.

Steve Salerno said...

To me that show personifies just about everything that's wrong with American culture

...and has it occurred to you that maybe I agree, which is why I wrote the post? Don't you think it's possible that all this stuff ties together at some level?

RevRon's Rants said...

People deal with the stresses of modern life in any number of ways. Losing themselves in faux-reality shows, surfing the Internet for porn, attending expensive, mind-numbing "workshops," watching movies that are completely removed from "real life," or expressing righteous indignation about the topics others choose to discuss on their own forums. Who's to say which diversion is more shallow, more useless in the grander scheme of life, or, for that matter, more benign (fatal outcomes notwithstanding)?

Each of us has our chosen diversions and/or obsessions. Those with which I personally find no value, I simply ignore in favor of those that I find at least entertaining. As to the subject bachelor's "hurt feelings," I suspect that the whole scenario was carefully constructed to add some degree of drama. Call it what you will, the effort has obviously paid off, if the dialog concerning the situation is any indication.

I took a class in college titled "Theater of the Absurd," and can't help but wonder if the producers of these reality shows (not to mention our politicians) might have taken a similar course themselves.

Steve Salerno said...

Rev: I like that "out-line" at the end. Very nice.

Elizabeth said...

"the betrayal hit [Jake] hard." He was "hurt."

LMAO. And LMAO. And then LMAO some more.

Priceless.

I don't watch this crap, Steve (and/or the so-called "women's programming.") In our household, reality TV, and The Bachelor-type doozies especially, are the butt (no pun?) of jokes, many off-color (well, so maybe a pun there, after all), when we acidentally stumble upon them during TV surfing.

But have a little anecdote to share, apropos.

After my brain surgery last year, when no longer in ICU, I was transferred to a recovery wing and put in a room with another (and very nice) woman who was watching The Bachelor(ette?) at the very moment when they wheeled me into my new -- our -- room.
She was maybe in her late 50s, and her daughter (mid-twenties perhaps) was staying with her.
There were two different TV sets in the room, which was divided by the usual flimsy fabric curtain between our beds.

The woman and her daughter were mesmerized by The Bachelor(ette?) and kept an ongoing and uber-enthusiastic commentary about it throughout (and later on the phone, after the daughter left).

I was out from painkillers at first and in no shape for social interactions, but soon after my arrival in the new room, my men came to visit and I perked up. It was at that time that my roommate asked, with a cheerful and undoubtful anticipation in her voice, whether I too watched The Bachelor(ette?). From the tone of her voice it was apparent what answer she expected from me. I will never forget the terrified looks on my men's faces at that moment (LOL).

Given my strong opinions and a definitely drugged state of mind, I guess they were bracing themselves for a response that is more typical for our household, and one which would definitely offend my roommate.

I managed to grind my teeth and say that, no, I don't, really, leaving it at that -- and watched my boys stiffle their giggles (while setting my TV on 24, which, even if not that much better than reality TV, is at least watchable, most of the time).

Now, my roommate was a delightful, kind and caring woman, recovering from a spine surgery, and she was quite helpful to me during our stay together. I remember her fondly.

But watching her and her daughter bond over The Bachelor(ette?) was a revelation to me. I knew the program was popular, even though it (and its sheer idea) makes me want to vomit, but I had never, until then, met a real life person who was so enthused about it. It was a shared and almost intimate experience between the two, something akin (I imagine) to what many men experience while watching sports on TV.

And, to tell you the truth, I felt like a stupid snob, especially when I got to know my roommate better, and realized how judgmental I was in my first reaction to her love of The Bachelor(ette?).

Sigh.

Still, it is unwatchable crap. And there is soooo much wrong with it, from the POV of human relationships and the image of them that this vulgar monstrosity promotes, that it makes me want to go on another rant about it.

Thankfully, you've already done it, Steve, so I don't have to. :)

Elizabeth said...

P.S. (and LOL)

Roger made an interesting typo (at least I think it's a typo):

I can't imagine why anyone would taste (sic) their time watching nonsense like The Bachelor.

This unintentional(?) error very well describes the experience of the two women in my recovery room. They fully "tasted" -- savored -- their time together watching it. It was clearly a positive and bonding experience for both.

So I agree with Ron (even though I despise the program myself) -- who are we to judge other people's interests and/or modes of distraction? (Not that this reflection would ever stop us from doing so. :)

I feel equally strongly (and negatively) about watching sports on TV (or anywhere else), which, I would assume, would not be a sentiment shared by the majority of men on this (or any) forum, even (or perhaps especially) those who are so appalled by The Bachelor and its ilk.

Goes to show ya, one person's waste of time is another's taste of time. :)

Dimension Skipper said...

From day one of the show, my reaction was... "When did dating become a spectator sport?"

I never "got" it and didn't bother to try. Am not a fan of these so-called reality shows in general, though some are worse than others imo when it comes to their "realities." Biggest Loser, American Idol, the dancing shows, and their ilk at least present a straightfoward goal or competition without too many weird hoops to jump through.

But I still don't watch. I have one friend who will watch the early American Idol rounds just for the bad acts. I say that 99% of those can't possibly think they're good, probably just want to get on TV. Personally I can't be bothered. And I'm not a fan of the belting-it-out "vocal gymnastics" style of the "better" talent.

The ones I really detest are the ones with the completely artificial scenarios and the overly long dramatic pauses with the ominous background music to heighten the tension while the camera pans across the faces of the various contestants awaiting their execution, uh, waiting to see if they get to go home. Survivor, Big Brother, The Bachelor et al... I'm proud to say I have never voluntarily watched anything beyond a minute or so unless it was on at someone else's house and I didn't want to be rude (by either outright leaving or throwing objects at the screen if I stayed).

But I try not to belittle or look down on those who do happen to find such shows entertaining or compelling in some way. (And I know many who do.) What Rev said...
___________

You know what, actually I guess I HAVE watched one reality show somewhat... Does Wipeout count?

Personally I don't really count it as part of the genre, but I guess technically it is. That one gets a pass from me simply because of the obvious silliness of it. It's sort of The Naked Gun of reality TV for me, so bad it's good. Just fun. And I marvelled at the engineering behind many of the games/obstacle course devices.

Not that I stayed glued to every minute of every show and worried about who "won", I just found it to be fun to watch. And even if the hosts playfully ridiculed the contestants, I'm pretty sure they were all in on the joke, that they understood the concept/premise of the show and didn't mind. It's just frothy silliness, often quite literally. (Though I did wonder what sort of legal waivers the contestants must have had to sign or what sort of insurance coverage the show had behind it.)

OTOH, I couldn't stand the show it was paired with, I Survived A Japanese Game Show. That one was just seemed even sillier yet (if that's possible), but minus the playful fun. It just didn't seem near as good-natured somehow.

I don't know if Deal Or No Deal counts as reality show or game show (in my mind there's a difference), but that's another one where, while apparently a significant number of people liked it, I just never saw anything compelling about it to even make me want to tune in. Watch somebody choose brief cases??? Why? Who cares? And the one or two times I channel surfed by after a brief pause, I'd see some contestant scratching his head giving it a lot of thought as to which case to ask to be opened, as if somehow he could really sense what was in each and had the power to choose correctly based on "the vibe" he was getting.

Finally, I'll leave you with this... BRING BACK THE GONG SHOW! You knew the point was just to have odd acts by everyday people trying to get on TV, but everyone had fun with it. And occasionally there was actually even a decent (if still a little offbeat) contestant to change things up. It was pre-Letterman stupid human tricks. (And speaking of... I wonder what HE thinks of The Bachelor "scandal?")

Dimension Skipper said...

I see Eliz's point about sports. Yes, that's yet another form of reality TV. And over the years sports has gotten more and more over the top with its pre-game build-ups, and in-game psychological analyses of the key players, and endless obscure stats (and I'm not just talking about "meaningful" playoff games either).

If you ever see even a snippet of, say, a '70s broadcast of a game, it's laughable how simple the on-screen graphics were. But I'd rather still have that than the dizzying, flashing, rotating graphics that float by ad nauseum. (These days I still watch some sports, but that's it, just watch the actual games. I skip the pre-game stuff and all post-game too unless it happens to be a championship for one of my local teams, but living near philly, that's rare! I don't read the sports pages anymore either except for the same rare scenario.)

Anyway, that's part of what I dislike about some of the "reality" shows, the overhype. Some wouldn't be so bad if they just didn't overdo every aspect, but mostly the dramatic tension angle. They so obviously build it up artificialy, especially with the ominous music as I mentioned. And the host drags it out summarizing exactly what's on the line while folks just want to know already who's staying and who's going home...

Perhaps it's just me, but I think this "overdone and overhyped" thing is a big problem in the world at large, not just on TV. I'm not sure if TV affects the world or the world is being reflected by TV or if it's a both ways kind of thing. Take a look at resumes or consider how people just casually use the word "awesome!" ("My dog just took a dump in the living room." "Awsome, Dude!")

My pet theory for the phenomenon is that it has to do with the still ever expanding population of the U.S./world (and especially certain specific regions) such that capitalism (or just the natural competition for "survival" and getting ahead in life) simply runs amok with everyone trying to outdo everyone else and stopping at almost mothing.

When I hear a hoagie place being advertised by a radio host as having "the best hoagies on the planet" I just gotta wonder... There's no way that could be true (or at least verified) so why bother saying it? To me it negates the spot entirely. It's obviously just saying stuff to say stuff, thinking it sounds good. I mean, I get hyperbole, but I think the world has moved into an era where everyone's just trying to out-hyperbole one another and reality was left in the dust long ago.

Listen to company slogans and you know they're just empty slogans, devoid of any sincerity of actually caring about their customers. They're much more interested in developing lucrative revenue streams than actually worrying about satisfying their customers on a personal basis.

It would be much more effective for me personally if, in the hoagie spot, the guy simply said, "Hey, they make a very good hoagie at a fair price, please come in and check'em out for yourself." Keep it simple and reasonable. It sounds much more true and sincere (even if it isn't). Overhype negates anything you're trying to say imo. But I know I'm getting way off track, so I'll reign it in.

One "other" last thing I gotta mention, but back on topic at least... For me Extreme Makeover: Home Edition may be the most annoying reality show of all. If they'd tone it down maybe 5000% and just present them doing the work for some deserving family and showed some of the appreciation in response, that would be fine. But they amp up everything about it, including the volume to beyond even Spinal Tap 11 levels. Yeesh! Must the host yell so much? Must whole villages of people show up and squeal as shrilly as possible? Just shut up already!

(Which I know is what others are likely muttering at me right now, so...)

Steve Salerno said...

DS: I agree with you about sports more than you probably think I would, even as an avid fan, which is why as time permits I'm working on an essay, "How to Watch the Super Bowl," that I think will be fun if I finish it and get it placed in time. I write ponderously, btw. Can take me two days to be reasonably happy with a sentence. Then I'll go on to something else and come back and rewrite it again on Day 4. I've even had cases where I'll send in the story, think about it some more and send a "revised version" before my editor has even read the original draft. Yes, I can be very annoying in many ways. (I did mention that I basically live and work in a basement, right?) I'm not saying that this perfectionism always shows--I'm sure there are times when I merely succeed at making the piece worse and more overwritten. But it's a sickness of a sort, and I don't know how to stop doing it.

As to EM:HE, at least they're doing something worth doing at the core; all that sound and fury signifies something (and may get us thinking about society's less fortunate and what more we could do to help). What does The Bachelor make us want to do, aside from maybe kill both him and the girls?

Elizabeth said...

What does The Bachelor make us want to do, aside from maybe kill both him and the girls?

(chuckle)

And how is this different from, say, watching the Super Bowl?

Steve, it's very similar, if not exactly the same type of a situation.

In The Bachelor(ette), we, generically speaking, are also watching a competition unfolding in real life (more or less), right in front of our eyes. We are rooting for our favorites, are riveted by unexpected developments, despise our "rival team(s)," etc. This is what the mother and daughter in my recovery room did. I'd say that the similarities between those spectacles are obvious. The Bachelor(ette) is a relational Super Bowl, if you will.

You (and I, and DimSkip, and many others) could say, of course, that dating is not a spectator sport or a competition, but we would certainly be wrong about the latter and only less so about the former.

Dating certainly is a competition; and I think we would have to acknowledge the marketing(?) genius of those who made this particular kind of competition into the spectator sport that it has become on reality TV. As unappealing as it may be for many of us (and, again, watching sports on TV is equally unappealing for many of us :).

Steve Salerno said...

Eliz: But I really think one could extend your logic to almost anything this's consumed or experienced vicariously (and even many things that are performed personally. I mean, if you think about it, why have kids? Just to have kids, so that they can have kids, and then their kids can have kids...? What/where is the ultimate point beyond the perpetuation of the species? Especially since parenting involves so much heartache). And when a line of reasoning is literally all-encompassing, or almost, and can be applied to just about anything, then what is its point, really?

I do think there are shades of meaning here that distinguish some activities (and "spectator sports") from others. Maybe this is a time when we need to fall back on RevRon's famous concept of "balance"?

Dimension Skipper said...

Eliz, good story about your hospital/Bachelor(ette) experience. I'm sure you were diplomatic. We do need to be careful not to judge viewers of shows we disdain in one big lump of snobbery even though it sounds like we all tend to do that from time to time, at least in virtual circles when we're not face to face with an actual live human being/fan.

I just thought I'd mention what sort of shows I DO like and watch... I've always had an affinity for science fiction and "weird stuff", so I've watched every incarnation of Star Trek, was a big fan of Joss Whedon's Buffy/Angel shows and Firefly, plus his current but "only two more episodes because NOBODY watched" Dollhouse. I enjoyed The X-files until the last few seasons, though I kept watching, and now Fringe is very much in the same vein.

Am eagerly anticipating the final season of Lost which has been a huge favorite of mine. I'm curious to see if they can wrap up things in any way that even approaches some sort of sense within the spirit of the show. Chuck is one of my newer favorites and I'm surprised it's getting a third season. I just think it's a lot of fun, not too deep or serious, but well done. I need some shows like that. Castle is another fun one I like so far, mainly for the two leads. The V remake seems promising so far.

FlashForward, though based on a book I read from an author I enjoy, has been a big disappointment. I'm watching just to see how they're gonna do things on TV for this first season, but I don't seem to care about the characters at all. I think it's horribly miscast and/or presented. Heroes is eh for me, but I still watch for some reason. (Mentioning those to illustrate that just because something's "weird" doesn't mean I automatically love it.)

In non-weird... House is a favorite, mostly for the main character himself though he's a despicable human being.

I watched 24 up through last season, but had grown tired of the gimmick concept and the contrived plot points over the last several seasons. I kept threatening to give up on the show. This coming season, I finally decided it's off my viewing list.

I've never liked the new wave of single-camera-style sitcoms and despise the now overdone mockumentary style. (I didn't even see a reason for or explanation given for it in the Modern Family pilot and I quickly dropped it.)

Big Bang Theory is the only sitcom I consistently enjoy. I still watch 2.5 Men too, but that's more by viewing inertia and time slot than anything else.

Keep in mind for me personally that I don't have cable TV, just antenna reception, so my selection is somewhat limited in the first place. (Though I don't mind.)
__________

Sorry Steve, I guess all that is completely besides the point of your post, but I just thought it could be interesting if folks would share a little of what they DO like on TV (and maybe some whys) instead of just simply ranting about The Bachelor and such. Might be interesting to see a quick sample cross-section of your readers' pop culture viewing habits. Yes? No?

If you'd rather not get into reading what everyone LIKES, then, of course, feel free to simply not publish this. I just thought it might be an interesting tangent. Plus maybe it's a chance to exercise some positive psychology around here, new year (MMX) and all that...


:-)

As for perfectionism in writing and pondering when something is "ready" to submit we sound like similarly feathered birds. At least you make a living at it and that in itself justifies the care (and habitual practice of such) with which you labor over things. I have no such excuse myself, just glitchy neurons.

I acknowledge your case for EM:HE, but just can't deal with the show. SB piece sounds good, hope it comes about.

Steve Salerno said...

NOTE: In my comment of 12:35, I obviously meant to say "that's" instead of "this's." I didn't feel like cutting and repasting the entire comment, as I sometimes do, especially since someone commented after I did.

Elizabeth said...

Why have kids?

An excellent question, Steve. :) (No, really.) Speaking of which: what's the ultimate point of watching sports on TV? (No, really?)

DimSkip, my top 6 are:

Frasier (always, in umpteenth reruns, knowing the lines by heart now),
3rd Rock from the Sun,
Arrested Development,
Law and Order,
X-Files (not the movies)
Fringe (with reservations).

Oh, and Bones, but not lately.

Dimension Skipper said...

Which again goes back to my just-too-damned-many-people theory whereby competition runs amok and things go haywire. With so many people competing for finite resources and positioning, and all the while consuming and further dwindling some of those resources, the competition gets more and more cut-throat and lurid. You have to do more, be more, say anything, do anything to get an edge or get noticed (in a positive sense, but at the same time NOT getting noticed if you're bending the rules). If you're not cheating, you're not trying. Second place is the first loser. That whole mentality.

Balance, indeed. But it gets harder and harder to balance against increasing IMbalance in the world.

Not sure if that makes sense or not. It's more just a personal perception of trends maybe. Or maybe it's just a bad mood, but more and more that's how I see the world.

Dimension Skipper said...

Eliz, I loved Frasier for the first 7 seasons or so, though after that it got spotty for me. (And btw, it's only shown late night/early morning hours for me locally, so barring insomnia I don't get the chance to see it anymore.) Same downturn of quality happened for the last 2-3 seasons of The X-Files too imo. And just as I loved the "Diane years" of Cheers, the "Rebecca years" steadily declined. I liked The Simpsons for about 10 seasons, but I can't figure how it's managed to stay around for 20.

I think that's typical of most shows, they just run out of creative steam eventually. Still I would gladly take reruns of any era of those shows (except The Simpsons which IS already endlessly rerun) over the endless parade of sitcom medicocrity (imo) of According To Jim, King of Queens, , etc. Heck, if I had my way, the early evening syndicated sitcom rotations would still include (in no particular order) The Bob Newhart Show, The Mary Tyler Moore Show, All in the Family, The Jeffersons, The Dick Van Dyke Show, The Beverly Hillbillies, The Odd Couple, Barney Miller (especially, as it's been ages since I saw it), M*A*S*H, The Honeymooners, Taxi, Cheers, Frasier, et al.

But no doubt I'm betraying my aged decrepitude in admitting many of those.

Come to think of it, I'd gladly take those shows in prime time over The Bachelor and his ilk which never had any creative steam to begin with!

;-)

Elizabeth said...

Speaking of the Edwardses, Steve, you may want see this interesting piece from NYMag:

Saint Elizabeth and the Ego Monster.

LizaJane said...

I own several TV sets, and I did not know, nor did I care to know, any of that.

Just because it's on doesn't mean you have to watch it (similar to: just because it exists doesn't mean you have to buy/own it). And you certainly don't have to listen to COMMENTARY about it. Sheesh. Change the channel!

We're not TV snobs around here -- we do watch our fair share of "mindless crap." But I suppose we draw the line somewhere around here. Never saw it, don't think I've missed much...

Markus said...

Steve, OK I look forward to it, I guess as an authority on the subject you'll have access to some info that others won't.

There's not much mention of James Arthur Ray here in Australia, but anyone who Google's him will think twice before dropping nine grand on his programs.

Yes, The Bachelor is frilly, but I figured that it still falls under the banner of self-help in giving people advice, so rock on.

Karl said...

I have just been watching a few clips on youtube of the great '76 movie "Network". Riveting performance by Peter Finch (for which he got a posthumous Academy Award) portraying Howard Beale, the star of a gritty tv reality show. One part in the movie shows Beale urging his viewers to open their windows and yell out that they are as mad as hell and aren't going to take it anymore.

The clips of Finch commenting on tv are amazingly appropriate to today and the mind numbing pap shown. If people stopped watching programs like "The Batchelor" and got a life, the programs would go away. No ratings, no advertising!

Steve Salerno said...

Karl: Thanks for joining us. With regard to Network, it bears noting that at the beginning of the film, Beale/Finch is the veteran anchor of a network news-hour who basically goes berserk during a broadcast, screaming profanities and threatening to commit suicide on-air, after he learns that he's about to be fired due to poor ratings. But viewers are so mesmerized by the outburst that ratings soar and the network not only decides to keep him but, as you point out, gives him his very own show. Quite a comment on the way things work in the modern era of lowest-common-denominator programming. Inspired and prescient film (right down to the ending). Paddy Chayevsky, the screenwriter, was so far ahead of his time.

As to Bachelor, the problem is that people won't stop watching. Not until the show just burns itself out naturally--and by that time the network will have come up with something just as stupid if not even stupider.... Or have we already forgotten Are You Hot?, with zero-talent pretty-boy Lorenzo Lamas using his trusty laser pointer to highlight minor flaws in the crotches of the bikini-clad lovelies on-stage?

Anonymous said...

Steve,

I love Americans!

My mom never misses a single program of these shows and cause I love my mom - I end up watching thjem with her. She loves the manuifactured hollywood romance so I leave her to her delusion but in my head I can't understand why these gorgeous evidently highly qualified and successful women put themselves in a harem style line up so the sultan de jour can pick his miss right this second!

What is with women these days?

Steve Salerno said...

Anon, that's the thing that gets me, too. I'm a man, and a man who loves women, but for the life of me I cannot understand why "girls" would allow themselves to become so subservient (in front of millions of viewers!), or subject themselves to that humiliation. And the funny thing is, the other series--the Bachelorette--hasn't done nearly as well, ratings-wise. And since these shows are watched overwhelmingly by women, that appears to tell us that women would rather see all of their fellow women make fools of themselves for a man (and find out who's ultimately lucky enough to be "picked") than watch one of the "sisters" be in the position of ultimate power. Weird.

Dimension Skipper said...

Another perspective on music-based reality shows vs sports and a potential pitfall of one of the basic differences between the two types of competition.

(I confess that I had absolutely no clue whatsoever about the song when it was referenced yesterday, then found out why today.)

Anonymous said...

wow.
I've been completely off network tv now for 17 months (cold turkey)
and naw - it wasn't that hard...I started seriously in 1968 right around the time "Laugh-in" showed up. When you're 16 and actually have a life, it's rather easy to ignore a boob-tube.

But seriously. Although this makes me feel like an alien visitor from another planet (who just can't understand what was ever important about a television, other than using it to run dvd movies through)
crap like Bachelor or ette just fits right in with so much other crap...Nascar, WWF wrestling, anything ever recorded by Barry Manilow, anything ever showcased by Lawrence Welk............
You know, it's rather sad. Because there used to be such wonderful stuff to laugh at, because of how stupid and lame it really was.
Either the fare now just isn't stupid and lame enough (like - they can't even get that down) or, on the other hand, they're trying too hard to pretend it means something. I dunno....

Still, I'm sure that reading the commentary, Steve - is infinitely more entertaining than actually watching the stuff...for me, anyhow.
(darn, had to use anon - because it's been so long in between reads that I can't remember who I am)