What Kind of Jollies?

[Peter Sarrett]

The reason Jeopardy! is getting ink now-- as opposed to at other times during its run-- is because what's happening now is an event.  One man beating all comers in a battle of wits for 30+ consecutive outings on national television, for the first time in the show's 20+ year history, and winning a record sum of money in the bargain-- that's a bonafide event.  It's a human interest story.  It's a success story.  It's a geek-inheriting-the-earth story.  It's a how-long-can-he-keep-it-going? story.  People want to know who Ken is, how he prepared for his feat, what it is about his background or personality that makes him able to do what he's doing.  People want to compare themselves to Ken and put themselves in his shoes.

People are writing and watching because what's going on now on Jeopardy! is an event.  This is exactly the kind of thing the producers were hoping for when they changed the rules to allow it, but on a scale they couldn't possibly have dreamed about.

It's not about watching someone win.  It's about bearing witness to the Moment.

[chris319]

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Jul 23 2004, 03:07 PM\']we all want to witness something no one has ever done before.[/quote]
How many people have won $1 million or more on U.S. television in the past five years?

[adamjk]

Sure a lot have done so, but how many have taken over a month to do it?

[Jimmy Owen]

[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Jul 23 2004, 05:32 PM\'] [quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Jul 23 2004, 03:07 PM\']we all want to witness something no one has ever done before.[/quote]
How many people have won $1 million or more on U.S. television in the past five years? [/quote]
 Well, quite a few, but not on plain ol' J!

[sshuffield70]

[quote name=\'adamjk\' date=\'Jul 23 2004, 05:37 PM\'] Sure a lot have done so, but how many have taken over a month to do it? [/quote]
 And "Survivor" doesn't count.

Which means only one......

JenKennings.

[Kevin Prather]

I can't believe you're still going on about this, Chris. Are you even considering the fact that you might be insulting Ken?

Allow me to redirect you to your Eligibility Requirements, specifically number six.

6. Distasteful Posts

Posts deemed to be offensive, in generally bad taste or inflammatory in nature, will subject the author to disciplinary action. Posting messages which are harassing, insulting, belittling or derisive to other board member(s), or which incite personal attacks against other board member(s), will be considered grounds for disciplinary action. A pattern of excessive and gratuitous use of foul language shall constitute grounds for disciplinary action.

These are your rules, so how about following them?

[Brandon Brooks]

[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Jul 23 2004, 02:58 PM\'] OK all you amateur Freuds out there, the question I pose to you is this:

What kind of jollies do TV viewers get from watching other people win large sums of money? I know I'd be ecstatic if it were my [/i]money, but you can't spend other people's money, so what's the big thrill? [/quote]
 Hmmm... let me take a wildly speculative guess.  You hate that Ken is winning so much money, right?  Why don't you just stop watching Jeopardy!, and better yet, if you don't like to see people win lots of money, why do you watch game shows at all?

Brandon Brooks

[Speedy G]

[quote name=\'adamjk\' date=\'Jul 23 2004, 05:37 PM\']Sure a lot have done so, but how many have taken over a month to do it?[/quote]
And that's a month on a show with a reputation for having the brightest contestants and the toughest questions you'll ever see on TV, too.

[dzinkin]

I was happy to watch Ken until I saw the photo composite that accompanied this article:

http://www.nypost.com/entertainment/27747.htm

Those of you who don't read the print edition of the Post should consider yourselves lucky.  I'm going to have nightmares for weeks. :-D

[tvrandywest]

[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Jul 23 2004, 01:50 PM\'] This gets to the question of why people watch (playalong) but not to the question of why they enjoy Jeopardy! most of the time but really, really enjoy it even more when the five-appearance rule is liften and a guy approaches and surpasses $1 million. [/quote]
Yes, playalong. But even more specifically it's about the audience member living vicariously through the contestant.

Again, the viewer is identifying with, relating to, emoting with, comparing him/herself to the contestant... having an emotional connection with and experiencing the action through the player.

The viewership, excitement and interest rises as the winning player's streak continues partially because we get to know him better and find it easier to connect with him (Ken is so telegenic, emotionally demonstrative and likeable - he's an ideal contestant), but primarily because it becomes even more of a rush imagining yourself in his shoes. It's more drama. Rockclimbing in a mall vs reaching the top of Mt. Everest. The common man doing the seemingly impossible. Dan Enright played this fiddle like it was a Stradivarius.

Now here's a question within a question: If viewers are drawn by the vicarious thrill of watching other people win big money as you say, why didn't Million Dollar Chance of a Lifetime or every state lottery program in existence take off?

Chris, you were quoting and referencing things I said at the top of your post, but are far afield of it now. Nowhere did I say anything about big money. NONE of it is about money. I've watched people with the personalities of floormops spin and win $3 million on the lottery show and it can be a giant bore. I need to be rooting for, identifying with, or even hating the player. It's about emotional involvement.

We only began to care about that woman who won $600 million (or whatever it was) a few weeks ago when we learned she worked as a janitor or something, or when we heard her friends talk about her. It's nothing without an emotional connection. Thus the overall term "playalong".

It's the same for all of reality TV. Eight jerks in a house only gets interesting when you start to like some, hate some, or get horny for one. How 'bout that effervescent blond? How hot is she, and how long would it take before I wanted to tell her to shut up!

Unless I care about the people "Big Brother" only makes me think about what kind of overtime those crews make on a 24/7 show!

Scroll back and read it all again... or give me a mic, pay me scale, and I'll read it for ya!   ;p


Randy
tvrandywest.com

[chris319]

You hate that Ken is winning so much money, right?

Wrong. Go back and read my posts. They revolve around the fact that for the past 30+ shows the matches have been grossly imbalanced and the outcomes totally predictable. This would apply whether he had $1 million or $1 hundred.

[tyshaun1]

Even so, Chris, I think Randy hit the nail on the head. Ken is a likeable person and intently smart, plus it is very intriguing to play along with a contestant who seemingly "knows all". Plus anyone who can humanize Alex Trebek on this show like Ken has, IMO, deserves some brownie points.

Tyshaun

[chris319]

Chris, you were quoting and referencing things I said at the top of your post, but are far afield of it now. Nowhere did I say anything about big money. NONE of it is about money.

Yes, I did digress with my question-within-a-question, but the original topic of this thread dealt with watching people win money on TV. Everyone is fixating solely on Ken Jennings when this discussion applies equally to Charles Van Doren, Joyce Brothers, Teddy Nadler, Thom McKee, Dave Legler, Leszek, etc.

Ken is so telegenic, emotionally demonstrative and likeable - he's an ideal contestant

In the opinion of many he is.

I think Peter Sarrett captured the essence of this dynamic best in saying that it's all about "the event".

[Brandon Brooks]

[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Jul 23 2004, 07:45 PM\'] Wrong. Go back and read my posts. They revolve around the fact that for the past 30+ shows the matches have been grossly imbalanced and the outcomes totally predictable. This would apply whether he had $1 million or $1 hundred. [/quote]
 Well, pardon me then.  So again, what's wrong with rooting for a likeable guy "beating the house?"  It isn't a crime that he knows his stuff.  I find  that an average joe taking a game show for a lot of money honestly is entertaining.  Quite frankly, that's the pretty much what attracts anyone to any game show, especially us fans.

Additionally, a lot of the games I have seen have not been always predictable.  Daily Doubles can change the course of a game really quickly, even when Ken finds them.  But there is something captivating about seeing him win, and America feels the same way even if it does baffle you.

However, you seem to take a lot of your frustration with J! and their unlimited wins rule on Ken.  It's your party and you can do what you want, but you angst is misplaced.

Brandon Brooks

[chris319]

you seem to take a lot of your frustration with J! and their unlimited wins rule on Ken

Wrong again. The unlimited appearance rule is not Ken's doing and I do not fault him for it. I simply don't find him as likable a contestant as many of our hard-boiled fans here. I'm sure Ken is a wonderful guy in person but I'm not going to enumerate my issues with him as a contestant here.