|
ITV Play...us for fools
King Crow gets in a flap over ITV Play's deceitfulness... The overnight television quiz is the preserve of isomniacs, maniacs and the truly desperate but they should at least have a fair chance of winning as they cradle the receiver and paw at the redial button. Not if ITV Play has anything to do with it. The ITV channel created purely to further prove the axiom that a fool and his money are easily parted, has been found in breach of the broadcasting code by Ofcom following a quiz about items commonly found in a woman's handbag. On September 21st 2005, the dead eyed host invited viewers to "identify things you find in a woman's handbag." When, after the usual hyperactive shouting and seemingly pointless countdowns, the game ended, only seven of the 13 prizes for revealing correct answers had been won. The remaining answers included "balaclava" and "rawl/rawl plugs" - a trade name for wall plugs. One can only assume that the producers had interviewed former members of the provisional IRA and DIY fanatics. Ofcom found ITV Play in breach of rule 2.11 of the broadcasting code, which states "competitions should be conducted fairly" and concluded that: "The inclusion of these answers was unreasonable and the competition was not conducted farirly." It is its first ruling against the channel but it is not likely to be the last. Other answers on that night included "rubber band", "directions", "false teeth", "contact lenses", "driving licence" and "plane tickets". Viewers were lured into using their underevolved fingers by the sample answer "mobile phone". ITV claimed that the full list of answers was reviewed by a senior producer and the channel's business manager prior to broadcast. These people are either a) idiots or b) married to very unconventional women. It did concede however that the answers in question "whilst not impossible, were unlikely to readily identified and were therefore inappropriate" - translation: "We had no idea that anyone with the intelligence to complain would be awake at that hour." Presented by frightening automatons barking idiotic phrases in sparsely decorated studios, these shows are the programmed equivalent of ambulance chaser ads and are just as cynical. More people should follow the example of the woman who called into the station and responded to the host's bleating for an answer with a deadpan statement: "I can't believe you get paid for this." |
||
|
|
Mas / Website (16.1.07 11:27) ITV is struggling to survive; they make lots of money from people phoning these shows (notice how they've a "daily limit" of 150 calls per person; at 75p per call, that's £112.50 per day per person who reaches that limit trying to win the £25,000 prize (or £50,000+ )) Additionally not all calls will be selected - having made 2 attempts to call a show when it looked "pretty dead" when I first saw it I realised it was just a big con. The hosts act as if they're waiting while no-one is calling in "please call in they plead, it's gotta be worth a go?" and the gulliable tens, hundreds ? pick up the phone and get "I'm sorry, you're not successful at this time" And the answers; while they have "simple games" where you have to read a chain of letters and make the 9 letter word ... they have the impossibles - the ladder games like in the example; "make your play" use the excuse "all these answers were sent in by members of the public" but these things are not family fortunes; we do not have the sensible obvious answers that 68% of a hundred people said "letterbox" when asked for something red - no - they pick the oddballs who say "my sweater" or "Brazil" which make no sense. I find it interesting watching the presenters and the ways they try and make the whole thing interesting; Alex Kramer bubbling over with sexuality - her "come phone me and maybe win more than a few quid" come to bed (or maybe "I wish I was in bed" ) eyes and suggestive mannerisms - and she's not the only one, obviously. It is a mugs game, just as are the daytime competitions - which are easier than GCSE or A level questions (whichever the press is jumping up and down about at this time) ... It is all crazy. But it keeps ITV afloat. Would it mean a similar thing from the BBC were they to go without the license fee ? M. |
|
King Crow (16.1.07 11:42) Hi Mas, ITV are struggling but to be honest the reason they are is a lack of good programmes and hence a lack of advertisers. ITV Play is a plaster applied to a major wound. If they insist on producing shows like Z-listers on BMX bikes and Celebrity Sexual Assault Island, their ad revenue will continue its inexorable slide. I find you're knowledge on this topic fascinating and yet frightening. Send us an article sometime. |
|
amillionpieces / Website (16.1.07 12:03) I just can't figure who is dumb enough to phone in on these things! |
|
Mas / Website (16.1.07 15:18) AMP: their prime audience is the much derrided 1am - 4am audience; which as we all know consists of drunks, insomniacs and students. All of which would have a situationally affected reasoning capacity; and the answers, as the hosts say, are "so easy; come on give it a go; what have you got to loose?" KC: I know what you mean; other than the weather girls there's not much in the way of reasons to tune in. Of course, we all know that in the months ahead, control of the broadcaster will be bought by Ant and Dec with the money of investors who have realised that the general viewing public tune in whenever Ant and Dec appear on ITV (which, of course, will be renamed AnD) - of course, after 96 hours of constant Ant and Dec, everyones' head will explode and cockroaches will take over; leading to ITV's best viewing figures for the past 5 years. They just need one hit show and it could all turn around. M |
