Extreme Makeover hunting for the unfortunate?

[Garrett]

Is this sensationalism, or ABC just trying to help someone out?
The AP is reporting that executives were caught by "The Smoking Gun" website for trying to focus on people with problems. Here's the story:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060327/ap_en_tv/tv_extreme_hardships_1

I hope I'm not the only one who finds something wrong with this...

 

[jjkktj]

> Is this sensationalism, or ABC just trying to help someone
> out?
> The AP is reporting that executives were caught by "The
> Smoking Gun" website for trying to focus on people with
> problems. Here's the story:
>
http://> news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060327/ap_en_tv/tv_extreme_hardships_1
>
>
> I hope I'm not the only one who finds something wrong with
> this...
>


To an extent I do as well. It probably has some aspects of sensationalism in it and the producers of the show know that a 'tear jerker' makes for better television. However there are also a ton of good stories out there so I don't think the producers need not do profiling to fine worthy families.

 

[spinner]

Well of course they look for people in the worst situations. I mean isn't the obvious? Have you ever seen a happy healthy family with money and a big house on there? I wouldn't want to.

 

[clichemoth]

> Is this sensationalism, or ABC just trying to help someone
> out?
> The AP is reporting that executives were caught by "The
> Smoking Gun" website for trying to focus on people with
> problems. Here's the story:
>
http://> news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060327/ap_en_tv/tv_extreme_hardships_1
>
>
> I hope I'm not the only one who finds something wrong with
> this...
>

And this is a surprise to anyone who's actually watched the show?

Of course they do this. I think they are looking more for people that they can genuinely help as opposed to exploit, but there's a very fine line there and it's not that hard to cross.

They do a much better job of not crossing it than the various Fox shows have, IMO.

 

[nuzguy]

> Well of course they look for people in the worst situations.
> I mean isn't the obvious? Have you ever seen a happy healthy
> family with money and a big house on there? I wouldn't want
> to.

Not likely that the producers in picking a family ask, "Let's see,how can we help these folks out on the upcoming episode?" You are correct saying, in effect, good news (a happy, healthy family) doesn't pull viewers OR advertisers, because the viewing public has been conditioned to demand people in dire straits and on their last leg as subjects for programs of this genre.

Can we imagine how "Father Knows Best" would be recast in the contemporary mold of dysfunctional, down-on-their-luck families?
>

 

[DougBroda]

I am so not troubled by this.

Obviously, they *should* be looking for people who have suffered and could really use a new home, rather than people who really don't need the help. It's not only the point of the program, it's good citizenship. (I'm a lawyer. I take some cases pro bono -- that is, without a fee. I offer free services to those who have compelling situations and need the help, not people who are without need. Just as I should.)

If, in seeking out needy families, they also look for situations they haven't featured before, and do so in an attempt to keep ratings high, that's OK, too. Why?

1) Because they are still looking for and helping truly needy and deserving people.

2) If they don't keep ratings up, the show doesn't stay on the air, and the companies that are giving away services and goods to the needy families (and getting publicity for doing so) will largely spend that money on advertising that benefits nobody but the companies.

> Is this sensationalism, or ABC just trying to help someone
> out?
> The AP is reporting that executives were caught by "The
> Smoking Gun" website for trying to focus on people with
> problems. Here's the story:
>
http://> news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060327/ap_en_tv/tv_extreme_hardships_1
>
>
> I hope I'm not the only one who finds something wrong with
> this...
>