People: Mike Richards speaks about J! experience, firing

[steveleb]

Nearly three years later thankfully this discourse has matured.  It certainly wasn’t that way when all of this went down. 

Agenda journalism and rushes to judgement have consequences.  That’s perhaps the biggest lesson that can be learned from this.

Now we return to our regularly scheduled programming

[Jeremy Nelson]

Agenda journalism and rushes to judgement have consequences.  That’s perhaps the biggest lesson that can be learned from this.

Except it wasn't a rush to jud- you know what? Ultimately, you're too close to the situation to provide an objective take. I think you underestimate just how bad a look those moves were at the time and overestimate what many of us felt should have been Mike's penance.

[tvwxman]

Nobody is saying Mike Richards shouldn't be working. Or even working in or hosting game shows. Just that the Jeopardy gig went off the rails and that firing him was probably the right decision. The entertainment industry is fickle. People get hired and fired all the time as I'm sure you're aware. I have no doubt that he will bounce back or has bounced back just fine.

Nobody is saying he shouldn't be working - but I would hope those in the know, who have followed this story closely, have seen plenty of different versions of what happend....come from one source. Richards.

"Someone called in sick and I, as EP , had to step in. (paraphasing) " Remember that nugget? Sorry, it just doesn't work that way with a multi-million dollar franchise.

"I wasn't accused of sexual harassment on TPIR ". Except , by the staff, who didn't like the temperture of the room you turned it up to.

And that's the problem - there's a whitewashing of facts going on - it happens a lot in the world today. I get that we're talking about a little quiz show, a blip on the radar of world issues, but if you're gonna still talk about to People Magazine...people are still gonna remember what went down, and why you're not hosting any show today.

I wasn't there, but it wasn't hard to figure out. Mike wanted to be a host. He got a few chances. Then he wanted the big shows. He got them to take a chance on him with an audition for Price, but then he prob realized it might be easier to get a foot in the hosting door, by actually being through the door as a producer.

If he had just behaved better........ he would have had better results. He didnt, and now he doesn't.

[steveleb]

Again.  More than one side to every story. And because I did see some of this first hand, not to mention a lot else with many others, I know a lot better than most that’s the case.

Fair point I’m close to the situation.  But until you see first hand conversations with women who think you’re enough of a sympathetic and meaningless nerd to discuss in front of you which executives might be most vulnerable to exaggerated accusations in the name of money, you can’t merely take the default view that what they allege is always true.

I’m not saying I know for fact that’s what happened at Fremantle.  Perhaps people thought he was a misogynistic asshole.  Trust me - he’s not the first, and he’s far from the worst offender.  There’s a LONG list of people you’ve never heard of that used incendiary language and would make references that might make outsiders uncomfortable. 

Is it “right”?  That’s not for me or you to say.  But I’d MUCH rather have an executive who knows how to do his job well and competently and keeps people employed than someone who dances on eggshells and doesn’t. 

And again- who are any of else to determine what is fair “penance”?   Does someone truly deserve a life sentence of castigation and blackballing because of something he or she was ALLEGED of doing?

Look into your own lives and employment situations (I’ll take the high road and assume you all do work somewhere).  Way worse had and still does go on.  Perhaps your company’s work isnt seen by several million people a night to make it “newsworthy”. 

Clearly none of that seems to matter to some of you.  I honestly hope none of you ever have to face the kind of accusations and partial truths that many people I know—many way better than Mike—have had to endure.  Or see first hand the impact they have on their loved ones.  There’s not enough compensation in the world that can make up for that feeling of hopelessness when you are falsely condemned.

And mind you- I’m not alleging Mike per se is a saint without fault.  And not everything he touched professionally turned to gold.  I worked with him on a pilot for a show called The Noise—a brain fart dreamed up by the same genuises I worked for that he felt he could execute.  A years worth of rudderless development later the only noise of consequence we heard were the groans of the assembled audience at run throughs.

I do think this topic has reached its limit of debatability.  You do you.  Just try and realize we are all imperfect to an extent.

[Nick]

In the end, what should have happened in the first place became the reality. Ken is host

I'm not following why so many people think this should have happened.  Should not the job of hosting TV's biggest quiz show have gone to someone with some actual broadcasting and game show hosting experience (Much as I think Mark L. Walberg should have gotten a crack at it, Tom Bergeron was the best suggestion I heard; and I think he ought not to have publicly turned down the suggestion that he'd be a good contender)?

Does someone truly deserve a life sentence of castigation and blackballing because of something he or she was ALLEGED of doing?... I honestly hope none of you ever have to face the kind of accusations and partial truths that many people I know—many way better than Mike—have had to endure.  Or see first hand the impact they have on their loved ones.  There’s not enough compensation in the world that can make up for that feeling of hopelessness when you are falsely condemned.

I don't think anyone here is disagreeing that Mike has been painted far worse than he actually was for any misdemeanours (and I use that term broadly) of which he has been alleged to have done.  I also think everyone here agrees that had he not done the things he did do (whatever they were but things a reasonable person should have recognized that, innocuous as it may have seemed to himself, could be the kinds of things that could get blown out of proportion if the wrong person found out), he would have saved himself a lot of trouble.  I think all of this is also a real testament to the huge problem in society today that any man who is alleged to have done anything deemed "inappropriate" that has sexual attached to it is immediately presumed guilty of said allegations with no opportunity to properly defend himself and very likely to see his personal character ruined.  That's definitely not a good thing.

But in the end, it seems the opinion here is that nobody really cares about Mike Richards and his "professional" work.  The public didn't know him when he became host of Jeopardy!, and the public doesn't know him any better now.  The fact that he feels the need to hire a publicist to get his name out there to "clear" it, if you will, is a bit ridiculous as if he thinks he so famous (or infamous) that such a piece is going to help smooth things over for his career.

The mess of allegations aside, if he's good at what he does (and I personally do not think that he is, but my opinion matters not the least bit in the eyes of those who could hire and fire him), then someone will hire him and he may eventually experience a Jack Barry-esque career comeback someday.  Certainly more high-profile people in showbusiness have been alleged of, accused of or admitted to worse and were hired again in the same industry after a very public exit; but as for this puff piece in People, personally, it just makes me say, "Stop thinking you are so good for the world of television game shows that somebody ought to hire you".

[tvwxman]

Does someone truly deserve a life sentence of castigation and blackballing because of something he or she was ALLEGED of doing?

What alleged? He's got multiple podcasts of him sounding like exactly the person who I wouldn't trust with the keys to a 60 year old television institution. (Or the Presidency, but that's just me doing me.)

You're conflating alleged behavior on one set, in which he was able to keep his nose clean, with another event that, when it was discovered on a podcast that he wasn't the spotless everyday-Joe-aw-shucks-i'm-surprised-that-I-focus-grouped-really-really-well.  And THAT'S the person Sony didn't want.

And for the record, If multiple salacious comments like Mikes came out of Ken Jennings mouth, we'd be saying the same thing. And if multiple salacious comments like Mikes came out of Aaron Rodgers' mouth, we'd be sa- you know what that's not a good example .

[inturnaround]

I'm not following why so many people think this should have happened.  Should not the job of hosting TV's biggest quiz show have gone to someone with some actual broadcasting and game show hosting experience (Much as I think Mark L. Walberg should have gotten a crack at it, Tom Bergeron was the best suggestion I heard; and I think he ought not to have publicly turned down the suggestion that he'd be a good contender)?

I won't lie and say that I thought Ken was the best host right out of the gate. He was shaky at first and part of that has to be that he knew what the stakes were and he knew he had big shoes to fill. But I think of all the possible choices, he was the one Jeopardy! fans would have had the most grace for in learning on the job. I also think that hosting Jeopardy! is not the same as hosting any other quiz show. I completely understand why Bergeron would have not even wanted to entertain taking over. I don't think Mark L Walberg was anywhere near the right person for the role. He's a decent presenter and host, but what he does lack, I feel, is gravitas. That's why a lot of the folks who did guest host J! were news people and not other game show hosts. You can teach folks to host a game show, even J!. But you can't teach gravitas, presence which is what makes someone better suited to the role than someone else.

But what I mean when I say what happened is ultimately should have happened is that Ken was the one person who was most adaptable to the task at hand. He knew quizzing, he knew being a contestant, he knew and loved Jeopardy!. That ended up being the perfect combination for the host.

[MSTieScott]

(Much as I think Mark L. Walberg should have gotten a crack at it, Tom Bergeron was the best suggestion I heard; and I think he ought not to have publicly turned down the suggestion that he'd be a good contender)?

I'm a fan of Tom Bergeron, but I agree with him that he wouldn't have been a good fit for the Jeopardy! hosting role. He's at his best when he's given the space to digress and ad-lib, and there's little room for game-stopping levity on Jeopardy! (Ken is developing a good feel for when a humorous aside can be quickly offered).

Hollywood Squares was a good show for Tom, but he was at his absolute best with Breakfast Time. It's a shame that there isn't space on the television dial for a show like that, because while I want to see him continue to work, a pilot of Tic Tac Dough wasn't the ideal use of his talents.

[Jimmy Owen]

Mike would have been off the air by now because of blandness.

[Nick]

I don't think Mark L Walberg was anywhere near the right person for the role. He's a decent presenter and host, but what he does lack, I feel, is gravitas. That's why a lot of the folks who did guest host J! were news people and not other game show hosts. You can teach folks to host a game show, even J!. But you can't teach gravitas, presence which is what makes someone better suited to the role than someone else.

I think going for news people was steering the wrong direction (not that there were a lot of people with game show hosting experience who weren't washed-up comedians from which to consider).  To me, it likens the job of Jeopardy! host to reading a lot of cue cards very quickly.  Sure, it involves reading a lot of copy, but there's that "traffic cop" element of game show hosting of keeping the proceedings moving, knowing how to bring out the best in the contestants in the process, which is not something I see a lot of news people doing.

I'm a fan of Tom Bergeron, but I agree with him that he wouldn't have been a good fit for the Jeopardy! hosting role. He's at his best when he's given the space to digress and ad-lib, and there's little room for game-stopping levity on Jeopardy!

I can agree that it definitely wouldn't have been his strongest fit for a show.  Just of the names bandied about his seemed to be the best that I heard since, again, he knows how to host game shows and hasn't been terrible at doing so.

Mike would have been off the air by now because of blandness.

I think this is the main point that's not being discussed when it comes to Mike hosting anything.  I've never understood the praise he's received for his work on The Pyramid or anything else.  He's not the least bit interesting or engaging.  He can read a teleprompter without a flub.  He can follow the game show host formula of knowing the right things to say to move the proceedings, do a contestant interview, build off something a contestant says to get a laugh and go on; but he has no charisma.

[jjman920]

In the end, what should have happened in the first place became the reality. Ken is host

I'm not following why so many people think this should have happened.  Should not the job of hosting TV's biggest quiz show have gone to someone with some actual broadcasting and game show hosting experience (Much as I think Mark L. Walberg should have gotten a crack at it, Tom Bergeron was the best suggestion I heard; and I think he ought not to have publicly turned down the suggestion that he'd be a good contender)?

Because Ken is a familiar face, which I'm sure they weighted heavily. I think, arguably, Ken is the most famous Jeopardy contestant of all-time in the show's 50 year history. It was clear from the moment they hired Ken to read an entire category of clues on air that he was the show's choice to step in for Alex at a moment's notice and, as revealed last year, he was planned to take over for Alex *before* Alex's death.

Ken wasn't as polished as a Walberg or Bergeron, but in terms of someone being familiar to audience and a comforting presence to the contestants onstage, it's Ken. That's been the biggest advantage for him when compared to the other guest hosts and Mayim. He really offers up a genuine connection to the contestants because he knows more than anyone what they're going through, and you can see it as he talks to them.

[Sodboy13]

I am of the mind that if Mike Richards had simply bided his time as EP and not hastily made his own coronation out of thin air, he could be less than six months away from making $10 million a year for the rest of his life hosting Wheel. But obviously, as his actions and machinations now and then show, he is not wired to wait.

[knagl]

I’m just curious as to why this story is dropping nearly three years after everyone has moved on.

I hardly believe someone at People Magazine said "Hey...remember that guy who hosted the show for like two weeks? Let's see where he is now!"

To answer why this is coming out now ... well, he's probably got a publicist that arranged the exclusive because he wants to get back to work.

I agree with Brandon and I think Otm is on to something here. Another "news" article from People dated March 23rd just appeared in my Google feed, and it's full of quotes from some guy named Mike Richards:

Former Price is Right Producer Reveals Protocol for When Excited Contestants Accidentally 'Pee Their Pants'

[Jeremy Nelson]

I think going for news people was steering the wrong direction (not that there were a lot of people with game show hosting experience who weren't washed-up comedians from which to consider).  To me, it likens the job of Jeopardy! host to reading a lot of cue cards very quickly. 

Reading a lot of copy effectively isn't easy. As seen by Brooke Burns, Sara Haines, and even Ken and Alex, you can definitely get really good at it, but it takes reps and a want to get better.

Sure, it involves reading a lot of copy, but there's that "traffic cop" element of game show hosting of keeping the proceedings moving, knowing how to bring out the best in the contestants in the process, which is not something I see a lot of news people doing.

News people are in constant movement during a broadcast, and those who attend their production meetings are well aware that fitting in as much content as they do requires keeping things moving and realizing what's most important- They're some of the best traffic cops in that regard. In addition, good newspeople are great interviewers and can do just that- bring the best out of people.

I think some us unfairly made the assumption that a newsperson could be dropped into a job like this for a seamless transition, but getting them up to speed and comfortable wouldn't be as hard as you're making it out to be.

[Jsach]

I am of the mind that if Mike Richards had simply bided his time as EP and not hastily made his own coronation out of thin air, he could be less than six months away from making $10 million a year for the rest of his life hosting Wheel. But obviously, as his actions and machinations now and then show, he is not wired to wait.

I am of the mind that if Trebek hadn't died when he did, Sajak wouldn't've renewed his last contract and Mike Richards would already be the host of Wheel for the past few years. Remember, Sajak renewed his contract one week after Mikey's departure. Probably because Sony didn't want both of their shows going through major transitions around the same time and backed up the money truck for him.