I'll take "Who called it?" for $1000 please, Alex. Oh, it's the Daily Double!!
Jeez BB, you don't leave much room for someone to actually be, you know, correct . . . chill man.
I'll take "People who will be missed" for $200, Alex
-
MajGenl.Meade
- Posts: 20764
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
- Location: Groot Brakrivier
- Contact:
Re: I'll take "People who will be missed" for $200, Alex
I'll take "Who called it?" for $1000 please, Alex. Oh, it's the Daily Double!!
Jeez BB, you don't leave much room for someone to actually be, you know, correct . . . chill man.
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
Re: I'll take "People who will be missed" for $200, Alex
I wouldn't hate him, but I'm still hoping for Ken Jennings. His performance was poised and understated, the way IMHO Jeopardy should be hosted. Levar Burton was not terrible, and he could well grow into the role, but I really don't know. There are a few of the guest hosts who would stop me from watching (Dr. Phil tops that list), but I'd give most of them a chance (even Aaron Rodgers), so long as the show does not change much.BoSoxGal wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 4:48 amThe average age of Jeopardy viewers is 65 - down from 70 in the year 2000.Joe Guy wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:42 amSeems to me that age is more of a determining factor than race in regards to hiring Geordi La Forge. At 64 yrs old, he is not a good long term investment so he's not a good choice, is he?
At his ancient age he should be spending most of his time on a holodeck.
Alex Trebek was 79 years old when he died of pancreatic cancer last year and left the host job open.
LeVar Burton is wildly popular with the fan base and brings a huge following from Reading Rainbow, STTNG, and his brilliant podcast. It’s reasonable to assume that given a fairer opportunity he’d do better than his first outing (I still haven’t seen those but will look them up online to see just how bad he was.)
Yes he’s black - that’s not the reason he should get the job, but it is a reason that giving him the job would create a lot of good will for the show. Sorry it bothers some of the folks posting here, but America is not staying white and a whole lot of Americans of all colors want to embrace and celebrate that reality, and to wholeheartedly reject the ugly vein of racism and xenophobia that has been bellowing the last few years. Having a beloved iconic game show hosted by a cultural BLACK icon like LeVar Burton would just be a really nice thing. It would be icing on the cake of having LeVar Burton without consideration for his race.
Re: I'll take "People who will be missed" for $200, Alex
Could it all have been this Machiavellian?
For those disinclined to read the entire article, the premise is that, because no permanent host selected could ever hope to live up to Alex Trebek in viewers' minds, there needed to be someone set up as a sacrificial lamb to absorb all of the anticipated negative reaction, so that the "real" permanent host could be rid of that baggage going forward. The intention was to shift the conversation around a new permanent host from "can this person hold a candle to Alex Trebek" to "is this person more palatable than designated sacrificial lamb".
If you believe that Hollywood poohbahs are actually that smart, it makes a lot of sense. Richards would have made the perfect candidate in that respect. As an insider, he would have known the plan from the get go, rather than setting someone up to fail unwittingly. Being able to shut down production with the new "permanent" host after a single day avoids risking an irretrievable loss in ratings. And by not choosing any of the other supposed candidates to act as the sacrificial lamb, none of them would have to wear that failure on their resume.
For those disinclined to read the entire article, the premise is that, because no permanent host selected could ever hope to live up to Alex Trebek in viewers' minds, there needed to be someone set up as a sacrificial lamb to absorb all of the anticipated negative reaction, so that the "real" permanent host could be rid of that baggage going forward. The intention was to shift the conversation around a new permanent host from "can this person hold a candle to Alex Trebek" to "is this person more palatable than designated sacrificial lamb".
If you believe that Hollywood poohbahs are actually that smart, it makes a lot of sense. Richards would have made the perfect candidate in that respect. As an insider, he would have known the plan from the get go, rather than setting someone up to fail unwittingly. Being able to shut down production with the new "permanent" host after a single day avoids risking an irretrievable loss in ratings. And by not choosing any of the other supposed candidates to act as the sacrificial lamb, none of them would have to wear that failure on their resume.
"If you don't have a seat at the table, you're on the menu."
-- Author unknown
-- Author unknown
Re: I'll take "People who will be missed" for $200, Alex
Interesting Scooter; personally, I think the article is giving the media moguls too much credit, but when Richards was announced as the "choice" I drew the conclusion that he was the choice from the beginning and the search was a smoke screen, so people could say, "he wasn't my first choice but her was better than ...", not to mention that the "who will be the next host" spectacle spiked Jeopardy ratings in the same way "Who killed JR" did for Dallas. Indeed, why not? The parade of potential hosts made new fans think the show might change for the "better" (i.e. more to their liking), while the maintaining of the usual format assured the stalwart fans that it would likely be a "new face but same show". It wouldn't last, and I think they'd be stupid to start a new host parade, but it worked for a few months.