The Television Game

I was reminded of this the other day. Michelle and I were talking about TV shows as we walked down to lunch and she asked if I watched "Survivor." I answered that I would watch "Survivor" if surviving were the point. Like, if they had to fight to the death or stay on the island until they gave up or starved… that would be interesting to watch.

So that got me thinking about a game we played in college, The Television Game. In The Television Game, you are a network executive and you have to plan your weekly primetime lineup to compete with other networks’ lineups. Can’t remember what T and I called our network, but we had shows on our lineup like “That Darn God,” as well as several others. We all compared our schedules and decided who “took” that hour of programming.

Yes, we’re nerds.

Anyway, that little conversation with Michelle made me think about what kind of a lineup I’d make for today’s audiences. I can’t imagine it would be difficult to do. Do people really enjoy "Dancing with the who the hell are these people? Stars?" Are people only watching "Gossip Girl" because there is nothing better on? Do they tune in to "Jersey Shore" just so they can say to themselves “Well, I may not be thin or good looking any more, but at least I don’t act like that!”

Here’s my weekday lineup:

Monday is typically hour-long drama night. "House." "Law & Order." "One Tree Hill." "Gossip Girl." I concede that drama does well on Monday. Especially medical drama. Or police drama. Or teenage angst drama. I just think my network will do it better. My show, “Teenage Wasteland,” will encompass all of that. It follows the lives of eleven teenagers and young twenty-somethings, set in the small suburb of Forest Mountain. Most of them exhibit the bored cruelty of the young and popular, but one of them is a cold-blooded killer. But the killer is not content to shoot or strangle. Oh, no. They take their victims slowly, by infecting them with some horrible disease that doctors will work to diagnose—sadly, always after the fact—every week. (Incredibly, all of their parents work for a local evil corporation that creates these diseases in a laboratory in order to sell to the military for biological warfare.) And the police must try to find the killer before another teenager dies—without implicating the politically powerful parents or the evil corporation, which owns pretty much all of Forest Mountain. All of this, of course, brings more angst to our young people. Irrationally, that will cause them to have more sex and drugs and be even more vicious to one another. I don’t know why, but that seems to be the pattern on those shows and, hey, the pattern seems to work.

Tuesday is reality TV day. "Dancing with the Has-beens Stars," "American Idol," "Biggest Loser"… I am convinced that people are only watching this because there is nothing else on. My network will fight the reality TV trend with an Un-Reality TV show called “Sparkling, Spinning Things with Fireworks and Animated Cats.” It will feature all of that, set to a soundtrack by Depeche Mode. I’ll advertise it as “An Acid Trip Without The Lasting Aftereffects of Real LSD” or something like that. It won’t matter. I’m sure that most people, when faced with choice of "The Show That Has Ruined Popular Music Forever By Convincing The World That Every Note Needs To Be Dragged Out Ridiculously Long And Run Through At Least A Two Octave Scale Twice While You Grimace As If You Swallowed A Poisonous Snake" and… well… anything else, people will make the right choice.

Wednesday seems to have no pattern of genres, and no clear winner in the ratings. So, Wednesday becomes my night for “Gripping News Stories,” a show about all those things we really want to know about. I’m not talking about what Congress is arguing about, or which companies are projecting second quarter losses. I’m talking about news you know you cannot look away from—like the CNN story the other day about the woman who was awake during her eye removal surgery, but was paralyzed and couldn’t tell anyone. Or the story about the guy in Ohio who kept all the dead bodies in his house after he killed them. Or pretty much anything about robots or people who’ve had to have foreign objects surgically removed from their bodies. I will follow that show up with an hour-long commentary show which reviews politics, music, fashion, literature, and—ironically—television shows, called “If I Had A Hammer.”

Thursday is Must See TV Night. This is typically where you’d want to put your powerhouse show, the one that everyone is going to watch and talk about the next day. Thursday will be a tough night. "CSI" has done well in this slot, as well as the newcomers, "Flash Forward" and "Fringe." (So has "Bones," but I have no idea why.) The big dogs, of course, are "The Office" and "30 Rock." So I have to bring out my big guns. Once upon a time, Thursday was ruled by "Friends." My show, "Zombie Friends," starts its season with “The One Where Rachel Eats The Landlord’s Brains And They All Get To Live In An Apartment They Couldn’t Otherwise Afford.” As always, the friends are sadly lacking in brains.

Friday is the kiss of death for TV. Thank God people have better things to do on a Friday night. Sadly, for most of them, those things usually involve some sort of alcohol. A good network executive, of course, will capitalize on this trend. My Friday lineup will include “Truth or Dare or Drink,” a game show based on the slumber party game. Contestants have the choice to tell a truth, take a dare, or do a shot. However, the audience will be equipped with electronic voting devices and they will be able to over ride the contestants’ decisions at any time.

Hi-larious!

Fantitlement

I heard this phrase the other day. Fantitlement. It's the belief that a fan's devotion to, knowledge of, or proximity to a celebrity somehow entitles them to be part of their life.

Now, you would think this would only apply to those crazy people who stalk celebs or have mosaic walls of photos of that celeb's eyes or forcibly move into the celeb's house while they are out of town or create a whole fictional past for their blog.

Not that last one. That's perfectly normal.

The point is: Yeah, these people have extreme cases of Fantitlement, but I think it's actually fairly common, to some degree.

Listen, a couple of years ago, I was at a Comic Con event and talked to a celeb's assistant. He told me it's a big issue with fans who want to touch, hug, even kiss this celeb. There was actually a sign up prohibiting it.

At first I thought, How sad that they have to actually put up a sign so people won't paw at him. But then I thought about it a little deeper.

From the stalker fan's perspective, this is someone they've watched on TV for several years. They've read about him, maybe even seen photos from life outside the TV show, heard stories about how nice he is, etc. Maybe that celeb did something in the show or in real life that had an impact on the fan. Maybe the celeb said something in support of a cause the fan supports. Or against one the fan is against. For whatever reason, the fan feels a connection to the celeb. (I'm not saying this is good, right, or agreeable in any way. Just saying this is how it happens.)

Of course, to the celeb, the fan is a complete stranger. So you can understand how creeped out the celeb must feel when that person leaps across the autograph table and attaches herself, lips first, to the poor guy. And, it must be very frustrating for the celeb to have to listen to all the rambling crap people want to share with them--even if it comes from that feeling that the celeb is part of their life.

All I can say is, most celebs realize that's all part of it. Even if they don't want it to be. Even if it's not fair. And I think most celebs are cool about it, as long as it doesn't get crazy. They put up a sign, or whatever.

Felicia Day, for instance, (I've not actually met Felicia, but I did see her meeting with fans at a con.) was a very good sport about it. She was very gracious and friendly. She was having a lot of fun with it. And I'm sure, since she is who she is, people were feeling plenty of fantitlement to her life. But, she was cool with it. After her handshaking session, she slapped on some hand sanitizer and went into the exhibit hall to shop. And I thought: Pretty cool, Felicia.

I used her first name, even though I don't know her personally. See? Fantitlement.

Hey, I'm not immune to it. I have met a few celebs at cons and in a previous job, working in television, and there are some celebs that I feel some measure of connection to. Not in a weird way, though, like creating a fictional past on a blog with a celeb. Again, that's perfectly normal.

Here's an example: A few years ago, Hayden Panettiere was at Gencon, as a spokesperson for a card game marketed to little girls. When she and her handler arrived at the booth, there were hundreds of little girls, waiting to talk to her, get her autograph, take a picture. By the time her allotted booth time was up, there were still little girls in line who had been standing there for hours. The handler told her it was time to leave and suggested that he could get her out of there without being mobbed by fans. But she said no. She wanted to make sure that all those little girls got a chance to talk to her.

And she met them. All of them.

And right there, that act made me a Hayden Panettiere fan. I've never met her. Probably never will. But if Hayden Panettiere comes up in a conversation, I'm gonna tell you what a outstanding person she is. I feel Fantitled to that opinion.

The Vast Wasteland

I actually took a course in college called Television: The Vast Wasteland. (Journalism major, remember?) The class was not about how crappy TV was, though. It was about how TV could be crappy, but could also be great. Like everything else in life, TV does not exist in a vacuum. Society changes it and it changes society.

I always laugh whenever I hear someone proclaim "I don't watch television" in the same tone of voice they might also say "I don't eat toenails." I suppose it's not the idea that a person doesn't watch television. Whatever. No one is forcing you to watch TV, people. The thing that I find offensive is the tone of voice. It says, "You're wrong/not as smart/not as good as me because you watch TV." It's kind of like those people who say "I don't knit with synthetic yarn." or "I only eat organic food."

Listen. These people don't know what they're talking about. Yes. It's definitely better to eat tomatoes and strawberries that have not been sprayed with chemicals. No one wants to eat toxins. But, as far as nutrition goes, there's no real evidence that organic = more nutritious. Does it taste better? I don't know. Could it be that, because organic food has a shorter shelf life, it comes from more local sources? And therefore, it's fresher? Fresh food definitely tastes better than old food.

And yarn? There is all kinds of yarn. No knitter or crocheter is better than another by virtue of their yarn choice. There are some awful synthetic yarns, yes. And there are some awful natural fibers, too. I've handled some really, really expensive wool that people always tell me is just the softest yarn ever. And it's scratchy. Look, I knit with wool, bamboo, silk, cotton, and acryllic. I've knitted with wire, with t-shirts, and with plastic bags. Hey, I've knitted with VCR tape and red vines candy. My yarn choice is not a reflection of my worth as a person. And if you think I'm not a real knitter because I've knit an afghan out of Worsted Weight Red Heart, well then...

Sorry. I was laughing.

Anyway, in defense of television in general, I have to stress two points:

1. There are all kinds of TV programs. They are not all for every person. Some people like reality TV shows like Hollywood Housewives, or whatever. I don't. Some people don't enjoy Game of Thrones. I do. I think there is enough variety on television that people can find whatever they want to watch, without it being a contest.

and

2. No one is making you watch. Or not watch.

Now, keep all of this in mind when I tell you that I have been binge-watching not only the SyFy Channel, but the Science Channel as well.

Synchronicity

I have noticed a strange convergence of events lately, a pattern that creates what I like to think of as a "theme" for the day. Or what The Police referred to as Synchronicity. (I know it was Jung, but let's face it. Sting is way hotter than Carl Jung.)

Usually it's something like several customers a day will buy magnets for no apparent reason. What I mean is, magnets are not on sale and there is no magnet-related holiday in the near future. I assume the customers have a specific reason to make their purchases. Or, sometimes the pattern will be something like everyone is buying items that are purple.

I've also noticed a pattern in people's names. As a lifelong Pat, I always notice when someone is also named Pat. So when I see four Pats in a row, it stands out to me. I don't like it, by the way, when others are named Pat. It feels like a contest to me. And I'm going to win that contest.

The television guide display also tends to follow patterns. T and I play that game... look at the display and try to discern the pattern. For example, if I see 40-Year-Old Virgin, Thor, and 2 Broke Girls on the same display screen, the pattern is "Kat Dennings."

You can try this game yourself. There are tons of patterns in the everyday world. It's not hard to find them. That may seem a little bit like A Beautiful Mind, but I have read that the human brain is just hardwired to find patterns in things. That's why we see faces in everyday objects like electrical outlets and car grilles.

Although this chair from my old office definitely has a face. An angry, scary face.

Or maybe I was just fed up with my job at that time.

Shh... Spoilers!

Now that would be a great title for a post about Dr. Who, wouldn't it? Too bad I'm really going to talk about spoilers.

As you know, T and I work 7 days a week. That means most of the TV we watch is recorded and watched later. God Bless whoever invented DVR. By logical extension, that means sometimes we are behind an episode on a show. So I guess you could say it's our own fault when this happens, but I think it's just a matter of manners.

Here's what happened. We went to dinner with a group of people that included friends and friends of friends. During the dinner conversation, one of the friends of friends started talking about a television show he enjoyed. Which was fine because T and I watch it too. (But T fell asleep in the middle of us watching the one before last and neither of us have watched the most recent episode yet.)

That's what I said. "I love that show. We're not caught up on it, so don't spoil anything." And punctuated this with a laugh. No one else had even heard of the show, so there was really no reason for this guy to be so specific.

So then this person proceeded to talk about the show, giving away key points, plot twists, surprises, and a very big surprise that apparently happened in the most recent episode. All of this while brushing off my protests of "Don't spoil anything." with "Oh, I know. But it was just such a shock to realize that (so-and-so) was actually (such-and-such) all along! And you don't find it out until (so-and-so does that thing that you never expected)."

See? I didn't spoil a damn thing. That's because I have manners, damn it.

This is not the first time this has happened or the first person to do it. In fact, every time Game of Thrones comes up at the store, I have to tell people "I don't want to hear anything about the book. AT ALL. The thing I love most about this show is its ability to surprise me with things I didn't see coming. DO NOT tell me anything at all."

Unfailingly, that person will say, "Yes, I know, but in the book..." NO! I don't want to hear it! I just told you that. "I'm just trying to tell you that, even though he's a bad guy now, later on, when he..." NO! What are you not understanding about no? "Once he gets his..." OH, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD.

And these people will follow me around trying to spoil the show for me. Not because they are being mean, I think, but because they somehow feel that justifying their opinion of a character using what they have read in later books is more important than the pleasure I have already stated I get from being surprised by the story.

People. Seriously. Shh! Spoilers!

We All Know What Day This Is

This is the day the Patriots are embarrassingly defeated on national television!

Well, we can hope. (Eli! Avenge your brother!)

I read yet another story today about yet another accusation of cheating by the Cheaters Patriots. Sure, it's just an accusation and there's no proof (because we all know what Belichick does with that proof). But you know what Patwoman always says: If two people see it, it's not a mirage.

As I was cruising the internet, looking for some sports writer who would give me some hope that the Giants would crush the Patriots (sadly, I've not found any with that opinion, and it may just be blind hope on my part) I found this test: What Kind Of Patriots Hater Are You?

It's fairly accurate, though it really only deals with my Belichick-loathing and not the whole package. Here are my results:

Because he rails against the sanctities of something we hold far more sacred than our own lives: the NFL. Not only does he cheat, he'd cheat if you were right there watching him do it. While he was at it, he'd run up the score, send out Rodney Harrison to shank your favorite team's quarterback, and then key their bus...

So, yeah, your hatred of the Patriots is completely justified. Be proud. But the point's moot. You can hate as much as you want, your opinion certainly doesn't matter to him. Nor to the NFL, which is going to keep making insane money off his success. But you can still hope that somehow, some way, someone will dent the guy's ego...

Judgment: You are an Utterly Inconsequential Patriots Hater.

And if you're a rational person, you're OK with that. Hatred, like a small wager, can make the game more interesting.

Go Giants!