Isn't it for old people? The whole set looks extremely bland and outdated. Viewers can barely get 1 out of 4 questions right. And everything is so stiff when watching. How is this show still going on? Seriously
share
It's simply not your speed, that's all. Fortunately, you can steam Robot Chicken when you need to challenge yourself.
You might question why views can "barely get 1 out of 4 questions right." That sounds like an unfortunate state of affairs to me. Jeopardy is well-liked because it actually requires skill and education to perform well.
Skill and education lmao. Where is the skill in this game? It's answering questions as fast as possible and understanding basic math. Where is the education? Knowing trivia and definitions? That shows no deeper understanding of any particular subject.
Keep on believing you're a genius for watching a pretentious game show.
Sigh. Yet you say 75% of the population can't answer the questions. I hate to tell you, but knowing math, history, science, literature, etc. is the very basis of education. Its not at all pretentious to admire those skills. It is pretentious to believer someone is a better person than someone else because of their skill or education.
You don't like Jeopardy. Fine. There is nor requirement you do so and your taste is your own. But denigrating one of the few game shows that requires knowledge seems pretentious on its own.
Like I said, knowing random facts does not show deeper knowledge on any particular subject. Where is the critical thinking, skill, or creativity from that? It's just completely random pieces of information.
share
If you want a math show where contestants need to solve equations, then that would be even more boring to the audience.
Jeopardy is a quiz show, yes, just more centered on things a well educated or well read (or both) person would know.
But if you really watch the show, there is at least some thinking going on in addition to pure fact recall. A lot of the answers wouldn't be known except for the small hints that appear both in the questions (yes, I realize I'm transposing "answers" and "questions") as well as the category. In the short amount of time, the contestant has to apply the hint to what he knows and buzz in before the other two.
Absolutely! When watching, I don't know the specific answers to some questions, but with some general knowledge & a hint in the right general direction provided, I can often make a fairly good guess as to the answer. As can many viewers, and of course all of the players. For anyone, that requires quick critical & logical thinking, e.g., "that cutoff date indicates such-and such a period, who was the leading political figure/artist/scientist in that place & time?"
shareThe show is really a bit of a scam. When you realize that the contestants are provide with advanced knowledge of the topic that will be covered it is really just a question of which contestant can study up the best on those topics. Add to that with Alex you had a host that had a tendency to often act condescending to the contestant that got it wrong when in fact Alex had the correct response on a card because he would have been too stupid to know if the answer was right or wrong himself and you it just makes you laugh at how stupid the show is.
shareI have never researched this. A quick search, however, revealed several former contestants who say that they do NOT receive any hint of what the categories will be. Now, I'm sure you could say they are only denying that to protect themselves. However, I would like to see what evidence you have that they are given the categories in advance.
Also, given that a category name doesn't necessarily reveal what the category will cover doesn't necessarily help.
I just remember there was some show on TV back in the 90's when I was in grad school and they were talking about games shows. Someone was going on about how smart the people on Jeopardy were but then another of the people on the show exposed the dirty little secret that the show gave topics to contestants before they appears. Given the obscure crap that sometimes comes up on the show and the fact that a contestant is able to answer it, you are left with two explanations, 1) there are people with near photographic memory of pointless obscure crap no one would even care about let alone want to know... or 2) the contestants have a list of topic to study and they include the shit on the show. I know which seems most plausible.
shareThat sounds like an anecdote, not evidence. I hate to tell you that a lot of people know a lot of obscure things. On some topics, I do (and on others I'm utterly ignorant.). A single story from someone doesn't rise to the level of evidence, or even suspicion. I know you seem to think your point number 2 is the more plausible, but I would say 1) is far more likely.
shareGiven game shows are really just another form of reality TV and reality TV is pretty fucking scripted I would think anyone with half a brain would realize number 2 in much more likely than number 1.
shareWell, if that could be proven, the show would be breaking the law and could be prosecuted. That is what happened in the 50's on the $64,000 Question. The main law is 47 U.S. Code Β§ 509 IIRC. There are others.
In addition, many contestants have said they are not given any help or previews. Given how many have lost, if previews were given I think there would be quite a few complaining publicly.
You can provide topics for a contest to study so long as you provide the same information to all contestants. Contestants don't speak about what happens on the show because they sign NDAs that forbid them to and often have 7 figure penalties if they break those agreements. The only reason the 50's show had a problem is that they were only giving information to one contestant.
shareSince all of that is untrue, I see no reason to continue. Multiple contestants have spoken about this. None seem to have been slapped with penalties. I knew one contestant and she said they were not given any advanced information. (And just to forestall the inevitable claims I didn't know one, her name is Peggy Kennedy. She appeared on the show in the 90s. She was a multi-day champion and competed again in one of the contest of champions.)
As I have said, if you are going to accuse this show of giving contestants advance knowledge of the categories you need to provide some kind of evidence. One person, somewhere, you vaguely remembering saying that is hardly even suspicious, let alone convincing.
You evidence that they don't is based on hearsay from someone who would have a reason to lie, as saying they had no knowledge would make her appear smarter than if she admitted they were given guides of what to study.
shareWe are not going to agree. You have claimed one source. I have mentioned several. I (and others) have pointed out this would be illegal. Yes, you claim if they do it for all it isn't. But if it was so innocuous, why not mention it to the audience.
I'm sure you won't believe it, but Mrs. Kennedy would not lie about such a thing. She was a brutally honest person and was difficult to be friends with. She did not hesitate to tell you the blunt, unpleasant truth, and that included things about herself.
I would love to see evidence that they have to sign NDAs.
I think this discussion in concluded.
That did happen. In the fifties...
There is no way any network, producer, or production company will risk rigging a game show today. The FCC will ream them but good and the guilty face arrest.
No
Freaking
Way
In the past they gave the precise questions and answer to one contestant to make sure he won. It wouldn't be rigging a game if you gave all the contests a list of topics to become familiar with.
share
Correct, it wouldn't technically be rigging under the FCC law as I understand it (and I'm not a lawyer), but it's a very slippery slope to navigate.
About 15 years ago there was a quiz show for kid "geniuses" where the producer of that program actually contacted the FCC because he learned of some shenanigans regarding the kids being prepped for the program. It had something to do with how the kids were prepared with subject matter, even if they weren't given the answers outright.
This is kind of like the MLB rule where a player must report gambling to the commissioner's office if he finds out about it, even if he's uninvolved, or he'll be banned as well as the guilty parties.
This is serious stuff that no one would want to risk.
Besides, any whiff of the contestants given even something innocuous as the subject matter would destroy the franchise in the eyes of the viewers and kill the cash cow immediately.
It's just not worth it.
Yes, the public finding out would be a big problem... much like the public finding out all the bullshit that goes on with your shows like American Idol or Survivor which is why show have contestants sign NDAs with such high extreme penalties that no one breaks them.
share
Yeah, "reality" shows.. don't get me started.
Given the obscure crap that sometimes comes up on the show and the fact that a contestant is able to answer it, you are left with two explanations, 1) there are people with near photographic memory of pointless obscure crap no one would even care about let alone want to know... or 2) the contestants have a list of topic to study
Shut up, whippersnapper!
share"Isn't it for old people?"
So, your logic is that if old people like it, it has no reason to exist.
I'm not sure ChipDouglas actually suffers from logic. He apparently doesn't see that an ability to pull all that "random" information forward in a tight time frame actually indicates a fairly deep mind (at least for most people. Yes, there are some savants who can only recall facts.)
shareThe show has too many american entertainment questions... it is designed to make average people think they are smart.
shareOld people? They constantly have Millennials and now Zillennials competing for the big bucks. I do wish the producers mixed up the age ranges more instead of lumping the same age group against each other.
Also, I've noticed with younger guests that they make the easiest questions about entertainment, history, and science while making it double hard for guests well into their 40s and upward. It's not rocket science to know the same stuff whether you're 25 or 65 years of age.
Are millenials and zillenials the main people watching this show?
share