“Come Monday…” is a weekly series that will involve a review of, or commentary about, websites, movies, documentaries, television shows, sports, music, and whatever else may tickle my fancy at the time. Be assured that these reviews will be generally positive, as in accordance to the Jimmy Buffett song “Come Monday.” This is subject to change, however. In fact, I would be most derelict in my duties to neglect going on a rant every once in a while. For rants promote change, and change can be good—right? Therefore, since good is generally considered as being a positive force in 99.3% of the parallel universes that I am aware of, even a rant could be considered as being something positive, and a genuine hissy-fit would be even better (so I’m told).
Alas, it is enough to make me wonder what may be wrong with me. For the powers that be at the various television networks keep pouring millions into the development of new unreality shows that I keep considering to be absolutely awful—both in premise and production.
The first episode of FOX’s [Does Someone Have To Go?] serves as a prime example of that. For not only was the deliberation process employed obviously faked, the producers of the show had the audacity to stretch it out over two parts that were not aired consecutively on the same day. Could it be that they were relying upon a study that determined that watching one hour (40 some minutes, actually) of really bad programming at a time does not cause as much permanent brain damage as watching two consecutive hours of it does?
No, that can’t be right. For permanent brain damage of the viewing audience would be needed to keep their shows on the air. After all, who in their right-mind would want to keep watching shows that forego all pretense of reality?
Okay, I suppose I should fill in some blanks for the benefit of those fortunate enough to have not seen the show yet. For what has me so upset is giving peers the power to determine the employment fate of fellow workers while expecting everything to be better than ever afterward.
No, it most certainly would not be for me, and I do not believe that it would be for most. Hey, would you be okay with working with someone who had made it quite clear that they do not believe that you should be making as much money as you do—not to mention believing that you do not know what you are doing to the detriment of the entire company? Come on now, do jurors have to live with those they have judged and are quite likely to seek retribution against them?
Yes, bosses have to work with those under them each and every day, but what makes this system work is that bosses and regular workers are on different levels that were recognized and accepted beforehand. Whereas, a show like Does Someone Have To Go? turns that on its head, and then leads us to believe that the corporate order of things will automatically reset and run even more smoothly afterward.
Now, if you want to get plumb technical about it, the first episode did not actually involve regular workers. For it had department heads standing in judgment of one another, but they were all supposedly on the same level, without the power to make any changes in another department.
Whether or not FOX was trying to catch some of the fire from CBS’s [Undercover Boss], I do not know, but they failed miserably. For Undercover Boss is far more realistic to me. Although, I find it quite baffling that successful businesses can be run by those who do not have all that much of a clue about how the business is really run. Yeah, I suppose I really do need to get out more.
Please Also Visit: