http://weibo.com/p/1001603822214137915964
2015 Nian 3 Yue 19 Ri 21:05
'' as a reference movie lines
along attached movies online:
http://www.bilibili.com/video/av1266773 /
In the translator's preface of "How to Read a Book", I mentioned this movie, and I was a little curious, so I went to watch it.
This movie tells the truth: in the United States in the 1950s, a quiz TV program was popular all over the country. A justice-seeking lawyer discovered that the TV program was deceptive and worked tirelessly to investigate the truth. However, the final result was not "the truth is revealed, all the truth is revealed"...
This TV program is very similar to the previous "Happy Dictionary" of CCTV: Ask some questions that ordinary people seldom pay attention to. If you pass the level successfully, you can get a huge bonus-but this TV show uses a form of competition between two people. Whoever gets the higher final score will get the bonus. Then next week, someone will continue to challenge, whether it can defend the champion depends on its ability.
I still remember when "Happy Dictionary" was on fire, our family also stayed in front of the TV every time it was aired, worrying about the fate of the contestants, and being amazed by the answers to such tricky and weird topics... In the United States at that time, TV entertainment was not as diverse as it is today, and its popularity is even greater than in China 50 years later.
It is supposed to be a competition based solely on the participants’ knowledge and luck. However, in fact, the fate of the participant is in the hands of the program producer, TV station owner and advertising sponsor: this participant has already been on stage. It’s been long enough, the audience has no freshness, it’s time to replace him; the contestant came from a scholarly family, he is also a university professor, and a talented person. He is very elegant and elegant. Female audiences all over the country are crazy for him. Climb, then let him stay on the stage.
How do people behind the scenes manipulate the results of the game? ——Naturally, let the contestants know the questions and answers in advance. Even their pawns must be designed to lose: they are asked to lose on a particularly simple problem that the public knows, which will cause a topic.
The lawyer representing justice could not tolerate the deception of the audience by the TV station. He worked hard to uncover the truth, but the result was not what he wanted...
"What I wanted to catch was the fault of the TV, and it turned out that we were completely under control. On TV.”
The inside story of the show was exposed, and even Charles, who was a contestant (actually he was the male protagonist...), lost his position as a university professor after telling the truth. Originally, the lawyer who cherished him a little bit didn’t want to. Ask him to come out to testify-but the sponsor and the TV station owner lied that they didn't know, and put the blame on the show producer. As for the producer of the show, it was not greatly affected either. After a few years, he made a TV show again. It was still very popular, and it was still very profitable.
"Years later, Dan Lai and Jack Barley once again joined hands on TV shows and became millionaires. National Radio and Guinness have never been affected by this scandal."
(Guinness is a product sold by the show sponsor)
Here is the audience The laughter as the background is really ironic...
TV shows deceive the audience-this "evil deeds" that may not be tolerated at first glance, has become grand-sounding in the words of the show producers:
"TV stations and sponsors make a profit, The contestants have generous bonuses and the audience is happy to watch. Who is hurt?"
——Yes, everyone has benefited, and no one suffers. Who is to blame?
I remembered the sentence again: children only look at right and wrong, and adults only look at benefits.
From the perspective of show producers and businessmen, Charles has brought them high ratings and increasing sales of goods. Of course, they have to keep this "trump card". What is cheating on the show; but look at the audience again, they There is also no "loyalty" or "sense of justice" at all-the show produced by the show producer is still very popular afterwards-or that the businessmen did this just to cater to such "audiences"?
"The audience does not want to know advanced knowledge, they want to see people win money." The TV station boss said.
Just as a large number of fans who do not care about "plagiarism" have created a large number of writers/screenwriters/cartoonists who make their fortunes by "plagiarism", perhaps, only when the audience values "right and wrong" more than "interests" can the market be purified. .
Moreover, this incident is certainly not a glorious history, but the United States can truthfully photograph it (this incident is not far from now, and it involves those bosses, consortia, etc., and the power and influence of them and future generations is obviously still Now, they did not prevent the filming of this "smearing" their own image. Either they were noble or they had no power to stop it. Which one do you think?), which is remarkable in itself to alert future generations.
PS has nothing to do with spit (hua) slot (chi): I don’t know if it is affected by the role setting. Later, the more I look at it, the more I feel that the lawyer is more handsome than Charles (laughs)~
View more about Quiz Show reviews
