jeopardy judges

[chris319]

Here's something I've been wondering since the Kanye West/Kelly Clarkson thing a few weeks back: Do the writers double-check every answer that's ruled incorrect or just the ones where a contestant appeals or someone on staff has a feeling that the response as given might turn out to be correct after all?

I'm not sure what you mean by "double check". They research all of the answers before they tape. They would not re-research a question unless an answer were controverted. If a question is called incorrect and nobody disputes it then there is no point in revisiting it.

[Mr. Armadillo]

"What is menage-a-trois?"

"You know, it might be...lemme get two hot friends of mine down here and...I'll be in my bunk."

[Unrealtor]

Here's something I've been wondering since the Kanye West/Kelly Clarkson thing a few weeks back: Do the writers double-check every answer that's ruled incorrect or just the ones where a contestant appeals or someone on staff has a feeling that the response as given might turn out to be correct after all?

I'm not sure what you mean by "double check". They research all of the answers before they tape. They would not re-research a question unless an answer were controverted. If a question is called incorrect and nobody disputes it then there is no point in revisiting it.

What I mean by double-check is confirm that the response does or does not fit the clue/category. I think some of this is just me looking at the situation from a post-Google world when the procedures are still around from long before it was a matter of seconds to search a reasonable first approximation of the entirety of human knowledge. I wasn't thinking of a full researching of every wrong answer, but it seems like there should be something about any incorrect response which could be found to contradict the information given. (e.g., if a clue is asked about the title woman in a Beatles song comes back with "Eleanor Roosevelt" instead of "Eleanor Rigby," all it would take to prove that it couldn't be Eleanor Roosevelt is a list of Beatles song titles.)

[Matt Ottinger]

. (e.g., if a clue is asked about the title woman in a Beatles song comes back with "Eleanor Roosevelt" instead of "Eleanor Rigby," all it would take to prove that it couldn't be Eleanor Roosevelt is a list of Beatles song titles.)

I know this is just an example, but let's roll with it.  If you're asking whether a player answering "Eleanor Roosevelt" would make the judges go and search a list of Beatles songs to make sure there wasn't one called "Eleanor Roosevelt", no, they don't do that.  If on a commercial break, the player says "I'm pretty sure there was a Beatles song called 'Eleanor Roosevelt', could you check and make sure?"  then they'll check and make sure.  Also, if one of the writers or judges or producers or whatever says "You know, I seem to remember that Ringo might have recorded an album about first ladies, maybe we should stop and look that up," then that will happen too.  But it does not happen for every single wrong answer that's supplied by a player.

[TLEberle]

(e.g., if a clue is asked about the title woman in a Beatles song comes back with "Eleanor Roosevelt" instead of "Eleanor Rigby," all it would take to prove that it couldn't be Eleanor Roosevelt is a list of Beatles song titles.)

But why would you bother wasting time on that? The answer isn't Roosevelt, it is Rigby. And now you've opened up an issue of "what constitutes valid search material?" If something legitimately sets off a beacon in somebody's head, sure, go do that check, but to check up to 117 wrong responses in that fashion would be silly because 116 or 117 of them are flat wrong.

[chris319]

They can't afford to do that kind of research in the studio with the crew on the clock while they do Google searches or thumb through the encyclopedia (unless you're doing Password Plus without a word authority and the producer has to thumb through the dictionary).