Author Topic: "I've Got A Secret" returns (Read 18252 times)

clemon79 · « **Reply #15 on:** March 15, 2006, 12:38:23 PM »

[quote name=\'rrg\' date=\'Mar 15 2006, 07:17 AM\']I confess that I don't understand what the problem is. Does someone really contend that it's "illegal" to show these because of the on-screen Winston logo? They've been shown many times since GSN launched in December 1994. For the first few years they didn't even excise the "sponsored by" announcements at the beginnings of cigarette-sponsored shows.

The owners of this intellectual property shouldn't be so easily intimidated.

[snapback]113000[/snapback]

[/quote]
I don't think they contend that it's illegal, so much as poor form to air a show that prominently plugs a sponsor who is at least partially responsible for the death of thousands of people.

And I don't have a problem with that at all. I can't say I enjoyed watching Herb Shriner tell people how sure he was that they were going to enjoy smoking their cartons of Old Gold, either.

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #16 on:** March 15, 2006, 01:32:29 PM »

Can't say I agree.

Tobacco advertising will always be part of America's pop culture history. Given what people know now; compared to 50 years ago...I see no harm in it.

Given all the "anti-drug" programs that are in effect these days in schools, if you light up...you're a moron.

Of course, I never thought tobacco companies should have been kept out of sports, either.

clemon79 · « **Reply #17 on:** March 15, 2006, 01:39:24 PM »

[quote name=\'Modor\' date=\'Mar 15 2006, 10:32 AM\']Can't say I agree.
[/quote]
Can't say that surprises me.

Quote

Tobacco advertising will always be part of America's pop culture history. Given what people know now; compared to 50 years ago...I see no harm in it.

Wow. You truly don't think there's a benefit from keeping tobacco advertising away from small impressionable children?

(Granted, at 2:00 in the morning? Maybe not as big of a deal. But personally, I like the idea of GSN showing some social responsibility.)

Quote

Of course, I never thought tobacco companies should have been kept out of sports, either.
[snapback]113027[/snapback]

Do you think the NASCAR championship should have remained the Winston Cup? Before you answer that, remember that the races air on weekend mornings in the lot of the country...when little kids are watching TV.

(And yeah, I'd ban the beer ads too.)

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #18 on:** March 15, 2006, 02:07:25 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Mar 15 2006, 01:39 PM\']Wow. You truly don't think there's a benefit from keeping tobacco advertising away from small impressionable children? [/quote]
Show me something that proves "small impressionable children" that are watching these programs, and I might concede the point. I think there'd be a benefit from taking some of the smut off television that there is now. But you don't see many people arguing that point. Why tobacco companies are always the target of ire, I'll never understand.

I highly doubt there's many that do.

Quote

Do you think the NASCAR championship should have remained the Winston Cup? Before you answer that, remember that the races air on weekend mornings in the lot of the country...when little kids are watching TV.

Considering Winston left voluntarily, I guess I don't have much of a say in that. I do believe that companies such as Kodiak and Skoal should have been allowed to stay--not only in auto racing, but in other sports as well.

I guess I don't see the harm in a car that says "WINSTON" on it, or a rodeo banner promoting Copenhagen.

clemon79 · « **Reply #19 on:** March 15, 2006, 02:08:55 PM »

[quote name=\'Modor\' date=\'Mar 15 2006, 11:07 AM\']I do believe that companies such as Kodiak and Skoal should have been allowed to stay--not only in auto racing, but in other sports as well.

I guess I don't see the harm in a car that says "WINSTON" on it, or a rodeo banner promoting Copenhagen.

[snapback]113033[/snapback]

[/quote]
Then I have but to say: wow.

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #20 on:** March 15, 2006, 02:16:34 PM »

Back to the standard response, I see.

I guess I'll ask you to show me the studies and/or evidence, then, that shows that advertising on a stock car directly contributed to not only a person picking up the habit, but ended up dying of a smoking related cause as well.

First amendment rights.

Brandon Brooks · « **Reply #21 on:** March 15, 2006, 02:18:22 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Mar 15 2006, 01:39 PM\'][quote name=\'Modor\' date=\'Mar 15 2006, 10:32 AM\']Can't say I agree.
[/quote]
Can't say that surprises me.
[/quote]
Ad hominem, Chris. Mark may usually be a tad grumpy, but in this instance, that wasn't fair. Has a pretty good argument, IMO.
[quote name=\'clemon79\']Wow. You truly don't think there's a benefit from keeping tobacco advertising away from small impressionable children?

(Granted, at 2:00 in the morning? Maybe not as big of a deal. But personally, I like the idea of GSN showing some social responsibility.)
[/quote]
I'm sure you may feel the same way about alcohol, which can be addictive since if used often enough it kills. I don't smoke (can't stand the crap), but I'm not particularly in favor of banning TV cigarette ads, and I'm certainly not in favor of the Game Show Network banning these shows. No one has a right to determine what's responsible for me (for things that are legal)--this is irrespective to these shows being aired at 2AM.

Quote

Do you think the NASCAR championship should have remained the Winston Cup? Before you answer that, remember that the races air on weekend mornings in the lot of the country...when little kids are watching TV.

I don't like NASCAR, but in my opinion, yes it should have. As parents, you should teach your children about the dangers of smoking. I wasn't raised by TV when I grew up, and no child should be either.

Quote

(And yeah, I'd ban the beer ads too.)
[snapback]113028[/snapback]

Ah, thought so. I understand your opinion, but I completely disagree.

Brandon Brooks

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #22 on:** March 15, 2006, 02:33:35 PM »

Getting back to GSN for a moment....

My impression has been that recently, their attitude has been that there's not much of a need to even make the cigarette shows an issue. With hundreds of episodes from which to select, it's a small matter of just not airing the ones that have the potential, however small, to create a problem.

At one point in the network history, you could make a compelling argument that the modern audience would benefit from seeing shows that had been locked away for so many decades. Long-time fans will remember that they actually made quite a big deal about airing the "lost" cigarette episodes originally. Now that these shows run at 3am, I think the attitude of "Why bother?" gives them one less thing, however small, to worry about.

rrg · « **Reply #23 on:** March 15, 2006, 03:20:26 PM »

You're probably right, though it's distressing to contemplate. I love these old shows and I hate the idea that they're locked away because of petty-mindedness.

It's great living here in the future, even without a flying car, but I want a future in which all this content is available to me in some form (for which I'm very willing to pay).

I did enjoy that slice of the past right after GSN launched (Dec. 1994) when they treated the old G-T B&W shows like the jewels that they are, showing them in prime time every weekday and frequently at other times.

Jimmy Owen · « **Reply #24 on:** March 15, 2006, 03:32:20 PM »

A DVD release is my thought with episodes selected and liner notes by Matt Ottinger (what a great gig that would be.) As far as GSN, I understand their position. There really shouldn't have any kind of cig. promotion on the airwaves. I would have thought a digital obscuring of the logos would be possible, but I share the feeling that they just don't want to go to the trouble. The show was a well-oiled machine in the late 50's-early '60's and that's where they want to start.

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #25 on:** March 15, 2006, 04:29:17 PM »

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Mar 15 2006, 04:32 PM\']A DVD release is my thought with episodes selected and liner notes by Matt Ottinger (what a great gig that would be.) [/quote]
Works for me!

Still, I've never been a fan of "selected" TV DVD collections. Gimme an entire season or forget it. Of course, if you're letting me pick 'em, I start with the one where Don Ameche played the IGAS home game, and another guest was Clyde Tombaugh, who had discovered Pluto. Bonus points for a Winston commercial featuring Art Fleming, though presumably he's in several episodes. (I DO get to leave the original commercials intact, don't I?)

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Mar 15 2006, 04:32 PM\']The show was a well-oiled machine in the late 50's-early '60's and that's where they want to start.[/quote]
That's another great -- or at least understandable -- reason for their choice. There is definitely a more "modern" feel to the Cullen-Palmer-Morgan-Myerson shows than to the pre-1959 shows, cigarettes or not.

Jimmy Owen · « **Reply #26 on:** March 15, 2006, 04:53:12 PM »

With DVD you can leave the original commercials in, smoking or not. Remember when GSN would have an MCR problem during WML? and you'd accidentally see Dennis James at 15x normal speed? The commercials exist on the kinescopes, keep em on the DVD. You could always set chapter stops at the beginning of each segment for those who want to cut to the chase.

rrg · « **Reply #27 on:** March 15, 2006, 04:55:33 PM »

Quote

There is definitely a more "modern" feel to the Cullen-Palmer-Morgan-Myerson shows than to the pre-1959 shows, cigarettes or not.

I guess. My antiquarian tastes lead me to prefer the older material regardless. It's fascinating on a deeper level.

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #28 on:** March 15, 2006, 10:28:16 PM »

[quote name=\'rrg\' date=\'Mar 15 2006, 05:55 PM\']

Quote

There is definitely a more "modern" feel to the Cullen-Palmer-Morgan-Myerson shows than to the pre-1959 shows, cigarettes or not.

I guess. My antiquarian tastes lead me to prefer the older material regardless. It's fascinating on a deeper level.[/quote]
Go up a level or two on this very thread and you'll see that I expressed my personal disappointment that they weren't starting from the beginning, or at least as close to the beginning as they have. Despite my personal preference, I'm just saying I understand where they're coming from.

rrg · « **Reply #29 on:** March 15, 2006, 11:43:31 PM »

I understand.

I just wish there were some way that it could be profitable for them to make the older material available.