Survey of Broadcasting: Assignment 1, Question 3: What were the events that led up to the “quiz show scandals”? What were the major effects after the scandal broke?–Videos

Posted on June 20, 2011. Filed under: Advertising, Broadcasting, Business, Communications, Ethical Practices, Ethics, Game Shows, Issues, Law, Movies, News, Politics, Television | Tags: , , , , , , , |

III. What were the events that led up to the “quiz show scandals”? What were the major effects after the scandal broke?

Where Knowledge Is King and The Reward King Size

The concept of winning a large sum of money on a quiz show by correctly answering a series of questions was not new to either television or radio. However, what was new and attracted a large percentage of the viewing audience was the television show, “The $64,000 Question”, that first aired on CBS on June 7, 1955. The contestants would be asked a series of progressively more difficult questions. If they answered correctly, they proceeded to the four big payoff questions: $8,000, $16,000, $32,000, and lastly the $64,000 question.

CBS-$64,000 Question-1956

$64,000 Question

The contestants answered their questions in isolation booths. Armed guards watched over the box that contained the questions that only the editors knew what the questions and correct answers were.

The $64,000 Question show was sponsored by Revlon. Revlon as a direct result of the show saw its sales skyrocket. The other networks quickly followed with their own big money shows. NBC aired “The Big Surprise” where contestants could win $100,000. CBS quickly responded with “The $64,000 Challenge” with a top money prize of $128,000. The show “Break the Bank offered a top prize of $250,000.  Finally, NBC had the show :”Twenty-One” where there was no limit as to the amount of money a contestant could win.

64 THOUSAND DOLLAR CHALLENGE SONNY FOX part 2 VINCENT PRICE

 

Twenty One: Stemple vs. Van Doren–Part One

Rumors began to circulate that the producers tried to keep popular contestants on the shows by “controlling” the questions asked and even coaching contestants to look nervous and tense while answering.

One contestant on “Twenty-One” charged that he was encouraged to take a dive or intentionally lose to another popular contestant, Charles Van Doren, a 30-year old English instructor at Columbia University. Van Doren stated that the quiz show was honest. The New York City district attorney’s office investigated the allegations and a grand jury was impaneled to hear the mounting evidence.

A losing contestant on NBC’s “Twenty-One” sent three self-addressed letter containing the questions and answers to an upcoming show by registered mail. These unopened envelopes were presented to the grand jury as evidence. Other contestants came forward indicating they too had been given the answers. In 1959 the House of Representatives conducted a hearing on the matter. One of the witnesses was Charles Van Doren who finally admitted that he too was given the answers and was coached.

By 1960 all the big money shows were taken off the air. The networks took  more control over program development and less power and control was given to the producers and sponsors of network shows. In the next few years, the networks attempted to restore their reputation and gain back the viewing public’s trust by broadcasting such shows as CBS Reports. Several networks also placed limits on the amounts of money contestants could win on quiz shows that were not rigged. These limits were repealed in 2008.

The Congress of the United States also passed amendments to the Communication Act of 1934 that were designed to prevent any one from fixing quiz shows in the future.

The Federal Communications Commission also ordered that the host of “Twenty-One”, Jack Barry, and the producer, Dan Enright, sell their  radio station in Hollywood, Florida, WGMA.

 

 

Background Articles and Videos

 

Twenty One: Stemple vs. Van Doren–Part Two

 

Twenty One: Stemple vs. Van Doren–Part Three

 

 

21-Quiz Show Scandals

 

Quiz Show Scandals

 Quiz Show Trailer

Quiz show scandals

“…The American quiz show scandals of the 1950s were a series of revelations that contestants of several popular television quiz shows were secretly given assistance by the show’s producers to arrange the outcome of a supposedly fair competition.

In 1956, the game show Twenty-One, hosted by Jack Barry, featured a contestant coached by producer Dan Enright to make the other contestant win the game. This was brought into focus in 1958 when Enright and Barry were revealed to have rigged the show and caused networks to cancel the quiz shows. This element of the scandal was portrayed in the 1994 movie Quiz Show.

As a result, many contestants’ reputations have been tarnished. The United States Congress passed the 1960 amendments of the Communications Act of 1934, preventing anyone from fixing quiz shows. Due to that action, many networks imposed a winnings limit on game shows, such as Wheel of Fortune, Jeopardy! and The Price Is Right (the limits were repealed by 2008). The scandal even resulted in the declining ratings of shows that were not rigged, such as You Bet Your Life.

Twenty One

“…Twenty One is an American game show that aired in the late 1950s. While it included the most popular contestant of the quiz show era, it achieved notoriety for being a rigged quiz show which nearly caused the demise of the entire genre in the wake of United States Senate investigations. The 1994 movie Quiz Show is based on these events.

In 1982, a pilot for a new version of the game (titled 21) was taped with Jim Lange hosting, but was not picked up. A new version aired in 2000 with Maury Povich hosting, lasting about five months on NBC. …”

“…Overview

The initial broadcast of Twenty One was played honestly, with no manipulation of the game by the producers. Unfortunately, that broadcast was, in the words of producer Dan Enright, “a dismal failure”; the first two contestants succeeded only in making a mockery of the format by how little they really knew. Show sponsor Geritol, upon seeing this opening-night performance, reportedly became furious with the results, and threatened to pull their sponsorship of the show if it happened again.

The end result: Twenty One was not merely “fixed”, it was almost totally choreographed. Contestants were cast almost as if they were actors, and in fact were active and (usually) willing partners in the deception. They were given instruction as to how to dress, what to say to the host, when to say it, what questions to answer, what questions to miss, even when to mop their brows in their isolation booths (which had air conditioning that could be cut off at will, to make them sweat more).

 Charles Van Doren

Charles Van Doren, a college professor, was introduced as a contestant on Twenty One on November 28, 1956, as a challenger to then-champion Herbert Stempel, a dominant contestant, though somewhat unpopular with viewers and eventually the sponsor. Van Doren and Stempel ultimately played to a series of four 21-21 games, with audience interest building with each passing week and each new game, until finally the clean-cut, “All American Boy” newcomer was able to outlast his bookish, quasi-intellectual opponent, who at one point after the game was referred to backstage as a “freak with a sponge memory”. The turning point came on a question directed to Stempel: “What film won the Academy Award for Best Picture in 1955?” Stempel legitimately knew the answer to that question was Marty, as it was one of his favorite films. The producers ordered him to answer the question with 1954’s Best Picture winner, On the Waterfront. Stempel later recalled that there was a moment in the booth when his conscience and sense of fair play warred with his sense of obligation and that he almost disrupted the scripted outcome by giving the correct answer. Stempel ultimately did as he was instructed, which opened the door for Van Doren to win the game and begin one of the longest and most storied runs of any champion in the history of television game shows.

Van Doren’s popularity soared as a result of his success on Twenty One, earning him a place on the cover of Time magazine and even a regular feature spot on NBC’s Today show; at one point, the program even surpassed CBS’ I Love Lucy in the ratings. He was finally unseated as champion on March 11, 1957, by a woman, Vivienne Nearing, after winning a total of $143,000.

In the meantime Stempel, disgruntled over being ordered to “take a dive,” attempted to blow the whistle on what exactly was going on behind the scenes at Twenty One, even going so far as to have a federal investigator look into the show. Initially, little came of these investigations and Stempel’s accusations were dismissed as jealousy because there was no hard evidence to back up his claims. But by August of 1958 Dotto, a popular CBS daytime game show, was abruptly canceled after a contestant found a notebook containing the answers to every question that was to be asked to Dotto’s current champion, future journalist Marie Winn. Suddenly, Stempel’s allegations began to make more sense. Even so, the public at large didn’t seem to want to accept the dishonesty until Van Doren, under oath before a House hearing, ultimately confessed to being given answers to all of his questions before each show.

Twenty One was canceled without warning after its broadcast of October 17, 1958. A nighttime version of Concentration took over its time slot the following week. The scandal forced producers Barry and Enright into virtual exile. Barry would not host another national TV show for more than a decade, and Enright moved to Canada to continue his production career.

Aftermath

The scandal also caused the Federal Communications Commission to mandate the sale of Barry-Enright’s radio station in Hollywood, Florida, WGMA. The station was purchased by its general manager, C. Edward Little, who promptly affiliated the station with the Mutual Broadcasting System. After serving for a time as the head of Mutual’s affiliates association, Little became the president of Mutual from 1972-1979. During this time Little created the Mutual Black Network, the first U.S. broadcast network catering exclusively to African-Americans, in addition to the Mutual Spanish Network and the Mutual Southwest Network. Under Little’s administration, Mutual became the first commercial broadcasting entity to use satellite technology for program delivery.

During his tenure as head of Mutual, Little hired Larry King to host an all-night phone-in talk show Little had created. King was a one-time announcer for Little at WGMA. King, who had previously hosted a similar morning show on Miami radio station WIOD, went on to national fame on both radio and television, winning a coveted Peabody Award along the way. King, therefore, indirectly owes a portion of his success to the quiz-show scandals.

Barry finally returned to game-show hosting in 1969, succeeding Dennis Wholey on ABC’s The Generation Gap for which he publicly thanked the producers and ABC-TV for giving him a chance for a comeback. In 1971, he sold ABC his first new game show The Reel Game which he also hosted. It ran for 13 weeks. He became a success again as a producer-host with The Joker’s Wild, which ran on CBS from 1972–1975 and in syndication from 1977-1986 (Barry died in June 1984 and was replaced by Bill Cullen for the final two years). Enright would work as Joker’s executive producer in the final year on CBS, and the two revived their partnership full-time in 1976, reviving Tic-Tac-Dough which also ran until 1986. It was revived once more in 1990, but was cancelled after a few months. Enright died in 1992. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiz_show_scandals

Advertisements
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Unit 5, Part 1–Ethics in Advertising

Posted on August 5, 2010. Filed under: Advertising, Bandwagon, Communications, Digital Communication, Ethical Practices, Ethics, Issues, Law, Mass Media, Policies, Politics, Regulations, Television, Web | Tags: , , , , |

Unit 5 ASSIGNMENT & FINAL- ADVERTISING

Advertising students:

Unit 6 has two parts
Part 1 is “Ethics in Advertising”
Part 2 is YOUR FINAL- Career exploration
I am giving you both at the same time so you can work on them at the same time.
Ethics Reading material:
Attached to this content is a pdf of several advertising cases against companies who either have made false claims and have gotten caught or who produced questionable advertisements. In addition, a word document that contains the lesson information on fallacies in advertising.
Unit 6, Assignment part 1:   Read the attached material and links.
[2 parts] In a 1-page (12 pt. font, double spaced) discuss a time you have been misled by an advertisement (whether print, video or audio). If possible, attached a link to an example of this product/ person. Attach your paper into your ecampus blog. Secondly, find 5 samples of ads that correlate with one of the top 10 fallacies in advertising (attached sheet). 
This is due Tuesday, August 10 at 5 p.m.
 
During the 2008 Presidential campaign, candidate Barack Obama ran the following television advertisement that mislead the American people as to the transparency and influence of special interests and their  lobbyists would have in his administration should he be elected President of the United States:
 
Barack Obama’s New TV Ad “Toughest” Aired 3/21

Fortunately I investigated both Presidential candidates on their positions on many issues and by September noticed a fairly consistent pattern of deception and lying on the part of candidate Barack Obama.

This pattern only continues and has gotten  much worse.

Many of those who voted for Barack Obama are now experiencing what in sales is called buyer’s remorse.

The sheer hypocrisy and deception are so palpable that even his supporters on the left are commenting upon it.

Once you lie or deceive a customer, it is very difficult, if not impossible for them to ever trust you again and buy your products and services.

More and more Americans are waking up to the fact that voting for Obama was a one big awfull mistake America.

No amount of political campaign advertisements will be able to overcome this basic lack of trust.

The American people do not like to be lied to and mislead.

Even the best advertising campaign cannot re-elect or sell damaged goods.

The following videos document the broken promises of Barack Obama on transparency and the influence of special interest and their Washington lobbyists in his administration:

 

Obama Already Breaking Promises On No Lobbyists In Administration

Major Garrett reports on the Obama Administrations transparency and lobbyist regulations

Cavuto Blasts Obama’s Transparency Claims: “People Have Had It With Phonies!”

Jack Cafferty Rips Obama on Failed Openness Pledge: ‘Just Another Lie Told for Political Expediency’

 

Obama Speech Followed By Lobbyist Visit?

Barack Obama on Lobbyists and His Campaign

THE GREAT DECEIVER

Many politicians are underestimating the impact that web sites such as YouTube are having with the voters.

Any politician’s position on an issue can be easily checked by using Google and YouTube to read and to view what a candidate stated position on an issue is.

A comparison of what was said during a political campaign can be compared with their actions once elected and in office.

Background Information

Former lobbyists in senior Obama administration positions

By: Timothy P. Carney
Examiner Columnist
February 2, 2010

“…Although Barack Obama promised lobbyists would not serve in his White House, and issued executive orders restricting former lobbyists, more than 40 ex-lobbyists now populate top jobs in the Obama administration, including three Cabinet secretaries, the Director of Central Intelligence, and many senior White House officials.

Below is our working list of ex-lobbyists in the Obama administration:

   Appointee    Agency  Administration position  Former employer  Selected former lobbying clients
. Barnes, Melody Domestic Policy Council Director Raben Group ACLU; Center for Reproductive Rights
. Barrien, Jacquelin Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Commissioner NAACP Legal Defense Fund NAACP Legal Defense Fund
. Beliveau, Emmett White House Deputy Assistant for Advance Patton Boggs PriceWaterhouseCoopers; Worldwide Medical Technologies; Shaw Group
. Butts, Cassandra White House Deputy Counsel Center for American Progress Center for American Progress
. Corr, William Health and Human Services Deputy Secretary Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids
. Coven, Martha White House Special Assistant Center on Budget & Policy Priorities Center on Budget & Policy Priorities
. Crowley, Phillip J. State Department Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Center for American Progress Center for American Progress
. Donilon, Thomas National Security Agency Deputy National Security Advisor Fannie Mae Fannie Mae
. Douglas, Derek White House Special Assistant for Urban Affairs O’Melveny & Myers; Center for American Progress Public Transportation Safety Int’l Corp.; Center for American Progress
. Frye, Jocelyn Office of the First Lady Director of Policy and Projects Nat’l Partnership for Women & Families Nat’l Partnership for Women & Families
. Gaspard, Patrick White House Political Affairs Director SEIU SEIU
. Gomez, Gabriella Department of Education Assistant Secretary American Federation of Teachers American Federation of Teachers
. Harden, Krysta Department of Agriculture Assistant Secretary Gordley Associates National Barley Growers Association; National Sunflower Association; American Soybean Association; U.S. Canola Association
. Harris, Scott Department of Energy General Counsel Harris, Wilshire & Grannis Microsoft; Cisco; Dell; Sprint
. Hayes, David Interior Department Deputy Secretary Latham & Watkins Sempra Energy; San Diego Gas & Electric; General Cigar Holdings
. Hirschhorn, Eric L. Department of Commerce Under Secretary for Export Administration Winston & Strawn Lockheed Martin; Sun Chemicals
. Hoffman, Alan Office of the Vice President Deputy Chief of Staff Timmons & Co.; RAND Corporation RAND Corporation, Unocal
. Holder, Eric DOJ Attorney General Covington & Burling Global Crossing; Large Scale Biology Corporation
. Kennedy, Sean White House Special Assistant AT&T AT&T
. Klain, Ron Office of the Vice President Chief of Staff O’Melveny & Myers Time Warner; ImClone; Fannie Mae
           
. Liebowitz, Jon Federal Trade Commission Chairman Motion Picture Association of America Motion Picture Association of America
. Litt, Robert Office of the Director of National Intelligence General Counsel Arnold & Porter Recording Industry Association of America
. Lynn, William J. Department of Defense Deputy Secretary Raytheon Raytheon
. Marantis, Demetrios J. U.S. Trade Representative Deputy USTR Akin Gump Lucent Technologies
. McDonough, Dennis White House Deputy Assistant to the President Center for American Progress Center for American Progress
. Munoz, Cecilia White House Director of Intergovernmental Affairs National Council of La Raza National Council of La Raza
. Panetta, Leon CIA Director Cassidy & Associates Seismic Safety Coalition
. Patterson, Mark Treasury Department Chief of Staff Goldman Sachs Goldman Sachs
. Perciasepe, Robert Environmental Protection Agency Deputy Commissioner National Audubon Society National Audubon Society
. Perrelli, Thomas J. Department of Justice Associate Attorney General Jenner & Block American Survivors of 8/7/98 Bombings of Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania
. Poneman, Daniel Department of Energy Deputy Secretary Hogan & Hartson Payless Shoe Source
. Punke, Michael U.S. Trade Representative Deputy USTR, WTO Mayer Brown Time Warner
. Rundlet, Peter White House Deputy Assistant Center for American Progress Center for American Progress
. Sapiro, Miriam U.S. Trade Representative Deputy USTR VeriSign VeriSign
. Sebelius, Kathleen Health and Human Services Secretary Kansas Trial Lawyers Association Kansas Trial Lawyers Association
. Sher, Susan Office of the First Lady Chief of Staff University of Chicago Hospitals University of Chicago Hospitals
. Siddiqui, Isi U.S. Trade Representative Chief Agricultural Negotiator CropLife America CropLife America
. Singiser, Dana White House Special Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs Akin Gump AT&T; Motion Picture Association of America; Apollo Advisors; American Express; Mortgage Insurance Companies of America; Pfizer; Bank of New York
. Stoner, Nancy Environmental Protection Agency Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water Natural Resources Defense Council Natural Resources Defense Council
. Strautmanis, Michael White House Office of Intergovernmental Affairs Chief of Staff Association of Trial Lawyers of America Association of Trial Lawyers of America
           
. Strickland, Thomas Department of the Interior Assistant Secretary Hogan & Hartson Amgen
. Sussman, Robert M. Environmental Protection Agencye Senior Policy Counsel Latham & Watkins Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, Navistar, Business Roundtable
. Sutphen, Mona White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stonebridge Int’l Angliss Int’l
. Taylor, Michael Food & Drug Administration Deputy Commissioner for Foods Monsanto Monsanto
. Thompson, Karl R. Department of Justice Lawyer, Office of Legal Counsel O’Melveny & Myers Hess, Occidental Petroleum
. Trasvina, John Department of Housing and Urban Development Assistant Secretary Mexican American Legal Defense Fund Mexican American Legal Defense Fund
. Turton, Dan White House Deputy Director of Legislative Affairs Timmons & Co. Freddie Mac; Chrysler; American Medical Association; Visa
. Varney, Christine DOJ Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust Hogan & Hartson  
. Verma, Richard State Department Assistant Secretary Steptoe & Johnson Cigna; National Association of Convenience Stores; U.S.-India Business Council
. Vilsack, Thomas U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Dorsey & Whitney; SELF National Education Association
. Wilkins, William J. IRS Chief Counsel Wilmer Cutler Swiss Bankers Association;

//

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Former-lobbyists-in-senior-Obama-administration-positions-83362902.html#ixzz0vlR3rVDt

Secondly, find 5 samples of ads that correlate with one of the top 10 fallacies in advertising (attached sheet):

The 10 most frequently used fallacies are

1.         Ad hominem (meaning “against the person”)—attacks the person and not the issue

2.         Appeal to emotions—manipulates people’s emotions in order to get their attention away from an important issue

3.         Bandwagon—creates the impression that everybody is doing it and so should you

4.         False dilemma—limits the possible choices to avoid consideration of another choice

5.         Appeal to the people—uses the views of the majority as a persuasive device

6.         Scare tactic—creates fear in people as evidence to support a claim

7.         False cause—wrongly assumes a cause and effect relationship

8.         Hasty generalization (or jumping to conclusions)—draws a conclusion about a population based on a small sample

9.         Red herring—presents an irrelevant topic to divert attention away from the original issue

10.       Traditional wisdom—uses the logic that the way things used to be is better than they are now, ignoring any problems of the past

An example of a false cause fallacy of assuming a cause and effect relationship between robots dropping an auto part and everybody obsessed with quality including the robot:

GM Robot Super Bowl Commercial

An example of an appeal to emotions in order to get your attention away from an important issue that you are watching too much television on both a television set and computer:

Hulu Alec Baldwin Commercial

 

An example of a false dilemma fallacy that limits choices between a silly breakfast and a serious breakfast:

Denny’s – Serious Breakfast

An example of a hasty generalization that if you use E*TRADE you will have a diversified investment portfolio.

NEW E*TRADE Baby – Girlfriend 

An example of  ad hominem fallacy political attack ad of Jon Corzine targeted against Chris Christie who is overweight. Chris Christie won the election and is now Governor of New Jersey.

 Jon Corzine – If

An example of  a bandwagon fallacy ad of every day should feel this good provided you eat Quaker oats high fiber hot cereal breakfast.

1992 TV Commercial: Wilford Brimley Quaker Oats

An classic example of a scare tactic to create fear that you better use one company’s computer then another company’s computer.

1984 Apple Commercial

 

Background Information

Huckabee Weighs In On Corzine’s “Fat Attack” On Christie

 

Corzine: ‘Probably A Good Idea’ To Not Say Christie ‘Threw His Weight Around

1992 TV Commercial: Wilford Brimley Quaker Oats

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Chapter 15 Ethical Practices and Policies

Posted on June 11, 2010. Filed under: Communications, Ethical Practices, Ethics, Mass Media, Policies | Tags: , , , , , , |

1. In 1986, more than 10,000 journalists visited Disney World, most of them on a junket. Why is this an ethical issue? Would you, as a reporter, accept such a trip?

2. How can “checkbook journalism” affect the quality of reporting?

3. Describe the ethical dilemma facing a reporter who learns a public figure is suffering from AIDS.

4. Explain what happened in the case of the staged GM truck explosion situation. Why was all of NBC’s news coverage compromised by that event?

5. Discuss the ethics of the kind of reporting done by Matt Drudge in “The Drudge Report” as discusses in the textbook. What, if any, ethical standards does he appear to apply? Are his methods appropriate for an online news site? Why or why not?

6. Should reporters transmit messages and/or pictures that result from events of terrorism? Why? Why not?

7. Pick any of the ethical situations specified in Chapter 15, and describe how each of the following philosophical principles would define your decision. A. Aristotle’s golden mean B. Kant’s categorical imperative C. Mill’s principle of utility D. Rawls’ veil of ignorance

8. What effect do you believe ethical codes, such as those described in Chapter 15, have on the professionals for whom they have been adopted?

9. How effective has the use of news councils, readers’ representatives and correction boxes been in overcoming ethical abuses and erroneous reporting?

10. Discuss the Poynter Institute’s 10-step approach to ethical decisionmaking. List at least three of the questions it recommends that journalists should ask themselves, and describe the questions in some detail.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...