“Our Little Genius” Update: Audience Reports of Questionable Activity
Edit: I just wanted to drive the point home again that, no, I don’t think the show is rigged. There are clearly shady goings-on or else it wouldn’t have been canned, but it’s not flat out rigged. Answers weren’t given away. We’ve been reporting on alleged stuff others have stated, and adding some thoughts.
The situation on Fox’s now-canceled quiz show Our Little Genius is pretty bad. It would have been larger news if the NBC late night ordeal wasn’t happening at the same time. To bring people up to speed if you are behind: Fox pulled Our Little Genius less than a week before its debut because there was an, “issue with how some information was relayed to contestants during…pre-production,” according to executive producer Mark Burnett. Some audience reports from Hollywood Junket are shedding some more light on this.
We briefly discussed this first issue. The child contestants were guaranteed $10,000. It takes three questions to reach the $10,000 milestone. If a kid doesn’t reach that point and loses earlier, they stopped tape and brought back the contestant to restart the game. It’s a bit shady and dumb, but so many shows have done it that I’m not calling shenanigans on this part. Million Dollar Password had a similar rule originally where contestants would get two shots going for the first milestone of $25,000. A lot of shows pick and choose the episodes to air and shelve others because they are deemed not exciting, so stuff like this happens. It sucks and it shouldn’t, but it does.
This one is, again, a report HollywoodJunket.com. The category of a question is given to the kid before the decision to stop with the money or play the question is stated by the parents. In one game attended by the entertainment website, the category was given and the kid said he didn’t know it. At this point taping was stopped for a few minutes. After this, the game began again and a new category was given. The kid knew this category well and the game proceeded. Someone from the show afterwards, to brush the situation off, said it was a “technical error” and the categories were “mixed up by mistake”.
So we’ve got this and we’ve got the alleged preproduction issues reported by the New York Times where information about the topics in the game were given out to the contestants in some way, and the two probably sync up somewhere along the line. If all this alleged information true it’s just about as bad as you can get without giving the kids the answers on a piece of paper beforehand. I’ll repeat again: it’s not that hard to make a game show. Mark Burnett is a fantastic reality producer; one of the best. But we’re trying to shove the reality-mentality of the picture perfect show where every moment is produced to the point of being scripted. It can’t happen. More information will be coming in during the next few days, so stay posted.
@ Mr. quiz: You’re right. Mark Burnett isn’t Mark Goodson. To quote a line from one of my favorite movies, Highlander “There can be only one”. However, as far as reality shows go, Mark Burnett is one of the best, like Mark Goodson was the best at making game shows. So, if you want to compare the two’s producing styles, there you go.
Granted. But the closest Goodson ever came to doing a reality show (when "reality TV" was defined by shows like "Real People" and "That's Incredible!" in the '80s) was something called "That's My Line," which was hosted by Bob Barker.
By contrast, "Our LIttle Genius" is (by definition, anyway) a true game show. And I've been engaged in past debates over "Survivor" being a game vs. reality show. (if it were a true game show, it's be history by now, with regard to past allegations of doctoring scenes, and lawsuits brought on by ex-perticipants, which would've resulted in more aggressive investigations by Standards & Practices at CBS)
So, I'll say it again, Mark Burnett ain't no Mark Goodson. He ought to stick to the type of reality show he does best.
Granted. But the closest Goodson ever came to doing a reality show (when "reality TV" was defined by shows like "Real People" and "That's Incredible!" in the '80s) was something called "That's My Line," which was hosted by Bob Barker.
By contrast, "Our LIttle Genius" is (by definition, anyway) a true game show. And I've been engaged in past debates over "Survivor" being a game vs. reality show. (if it were a true game show, it's be history by now, with regard to past allegations of doctoring scenes, and lawsuits brought on by ex-perticipants, which would've resulted in more aggressive investigations by Standards & Practices at CBS)
So, I'll say it again, Mark Burnett ain't no Mark Goodson. He ought to stick to the type of reality show he does best.
Wow! This is my first taste of a "potential game/reality show scandal" in my lifetime. I've heard about the ones from the 50's. Unfortunately, just when game shows were starting to come around, this stuff happens. UGGGHHHH!!!!!
Wow! This is my first taste of a "potential game/reality show scandal" in my lifetime. I've heard about the ones from the 50's. Unfortunately, just when game shows were starting to come around, this stuff happens. UGGGHHHH!!!!!
More from the commenter…
But here's the dumbest thing of all: the show's concept is ONE child per episode, answering 4-part questions, and they can't get ANY PART of ANY question wrong. What happens when they miss question number 2? The producers need 30 minutes of TV from one kid, which means they have to make sure that kid doesn't miss a question until/unless the show is over. That means cheating and wasting time talking to experts and parents in between EVERY question, drawing the whole thing out. If they were smart, they'd do it fast, and they'd have multiple kids on each episode.
I could care less about Leno. Why does NBC love him so much? I thought he was going to retire.
It's the same thing with CBS and Bob Barker.
I've said this once before…Mark Burnett ain't no Mark GOODSON! And, I do agree with Otm_Shank.
We have it…It's called Millionaire.
For my most recent column, I wrote about OLG and the controversy surrounding it. I received the following post from someone who said he attending tapings for two episodes….
I live in L.A. and was in the audience for the first two shows they taped. Here's why you're right. Before the contestant even came out, they did all sorts of coverage of the parents looking concerned and worried about their kids' abilities and working in the phrase "Our Little Genius" to everything they said. Ew. It made normal parents seem false and stilted and not a little creepy.
Here's also why the show doesn't work. It took well over two hours to film the show. That means a kid under age 10 is STANDING in the same spot for 2 hours and they don't know why and they didn't seem to like it.
More from the commenter…
But here's the dumbest thing of all: the show's concept is ONE child per episode, answering 4-part questions, and they can't get ANY PART of ANY question wrong. What happens when they miss question number 2? The producers need 30 minutes of TV from one kid, which means they have to make sure that kid doesn't miss a question until/unless the show is over. That means cheating and wasting time talking to experts and parents in between EVERY question, drawing the whole thing out. If they were smart, they'd do it fast, and they'd have multiple kids on each episode.
No, I meant the original (rigged) Twenty-One. Ha Ha, though I cannot believe that with Standards and Practices departments at each network, that anything close to this was allowed to occur at Fox. BTW, wasn't the $64K Question eventually swept up in the quiz show scandals, i.e. rigged at some point? What is ironic is that during the quiz show era, the reasoning provided was "entertainment." The sad thing is that Fox long ago proved its abiiity to produce a legitimate, exciting, big-money show. It was called Greed.
What is going on at NBC shows why they are in the ratings basement. The problem is not Conan at 11:30pm; it is the 10:00 lead-in that is killing the affiliate news ratings. That 10pm lead in is Jay Leno. Moving Jay does not solve the 10pm void and lack of a solid lead-in. I do not understand the apparent blind loyalty to Jay Leno. The answer must be that they are scared Jay will bolt. But logically, Jay has nowhere to go. He is not edgy enough for Fox and ABC is not eager to drop Nightline. Bill Carter has the makings for another book on the late-night wars. If NBC moves Jay to 11:30 and starts Conan at 12 Midnight, maybe everybody wins, because you could no longer compare the shows head-to-head against Letterman.
The 2000 version of TWENTY-ONE actually did reasonably well, all things considered. The shitheads at NBC couldn't be bothered promoting this show, except for the episode where David Lindler won $1M; and to compound things, they kept moving it to different time slots. If that had been me, and I had it my way, I'd have promoted the hell out of this show, and taken my chances there. I mean, what's the point of putting ANY television show on the air, if it's not going to get the kind of promotion it's entitled to, right?
AMEN! AMEN!!! AMEN!!!!
"The $64,000 Question" was rigged, but not like "21." It's tactic went something like this: During the interviews with prospective contestants, the contestant coordinators (as they should STILL be referred to; not "casting." I mean, these are f*****g game/reality shows, not movies, or theater! But, I digress…) would "spontaneously" throw questions to the interviewee, based on what their alleged area of expertise was. If they knew the answer, fine. If not, they'd be given the answer. This would continue throughout the screening process, and finally, when the interview was finished, the contestant coordinator would "remind" the interviewee of that "missed" question and answer.
"The $64,000 Question" was rigged, but not like "21." It's tactic went something like this: During the interviews with prospective contestants, the contestant coordinators (as they should STILL be referred to; not "casting." I mean, these are f*****g game/reality shows, not movies, or theater! But, I digress…) would "spontaneously" throw questions to the interviewee, based on what their alleged area of expertise was. If they knew the answer, fine. If not, they'd be given the answer. This would continue throughout the screening process, and finally, when the interview was finished, the contestant coordinator would "remind" the interviewee of that "missed" question and answer.
The 2000 version of TWENTY-ONE actually did reasonably well, all things considered. The shitheads at NBC couldn't be bothered promoting this show, except for the episode where David Lindler won $1M; and to compound things, they kept moving it to different time slots. If that had been me, and I had it my way, I'd have promoted the hell out of this show, and taken my chances there. I mean, what's the point of putting ANY television show on the air, if it's not going to get the kind of promotion it's entitled to, right?
And that proves that Goodson couldn't do reality shows. He stuck with what he knew.
And that proves that Goodson couldn't do reality shows. He stuck with what he knew.
It sounds just like OLG.
No, it proves nothing, as long as you define a "reality show" by current standards, his company never produced one.
Too bad he's no longer with us. It'd be interesting to know what he might've thought of "Survivor," "The Apprentice," and especially "The Biggest Loser."
We can only (second) guess.
No, it proves nothing, as long as you define a "reality show" by current standards, his company never produced one.
Too bad he's no longer with us. It'd be interesting to know what he might've thought of "Survivor," "The Apprentice," and especially "The Biggest Loser."
We can only (second) guess.
Well, we have his son, Jon. He's mostly into lottery game shows though. I wish we had one in NC.
Well, we have his son, Jon. He's mostly into lottery game shows though. I wish we had one in NC.
And lie detectors, as popular as they are, they are basically pseudoscience. A lot of dangerous criminals passed the lie detector test, even though they were guilty, while people were wrongfully sent to prison because they failed the test. I think Lie Detectors should just be abolished once and for all.
Just another place for people to brag and try to show off their kids, like we don't have enough of that anywhere else. When i first saw this show, i was hoping it would never make it and I got my wish. Instead of people worrying about making your kid the smartest, why don't you work on making them polite and responsible. Qualities we are sorely lacking in todays world. Parents are so insecure they have to boast about their kids to make themselves feel better.
Yeah, then maybe we wouldn't be hearing about the Moment of Truth. YUCK!
Yeah, then maybe we wouldn't be hearing about the Moment of Truth. YUCK!
Just another place for people to brag and try to show off their kids, like we don't have enough of that anywhere else. When i first saw this show, i was hoping it would never make it and I got my wish. Instead of people worrying about making your kid the smartest, why don't you work on making them polite and responsible. Qualities we are sorely lacking in todays world. Parents are so insecure they have to boast about their kids to make themselves feel better.
Just another place for people to brag and try to show off their kids, like we don't have enough of that anywhere else. When i first saw this show, i was hoping it would never make it and I got my wish. Instead of people worrying about making your kid the smartest, why don't you work on making them polite and responsible. Qualities we are sorely lacking in todays world. Parents are so insecure they have to boast about their kids to make themselves feel better.
They have 3 shows for that already. "Supernanny", "Brat Camp", "World's Strictest Parents".