Options
would ratings win over (any) substance?
Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 2,211 Forum Member
✭✭✭
i'm thinking about the main channels (BBC1, ITV, Sky1) when i post this question. if you think shows such as splash or tumble were pretty weak, imagine for the purposes of my question that one of the main broadcasters takes a gamble on a show called 'tongue roll' that makes the aforementioned look like pieces of entertainment brilliance!
the format, set in a studio in front of a live audience with one of the usual light entertainment presenters, sees various celebrities pitted against members of the studio audience. it's one on one, and the challenge is simply to see who can roll their tongue the best. each week sees 5 x celebrities pitted against 5 x members of the audience. the show airs on a saturday evening at 7pm on the broadcasters flagship channel. if the celebrity wins their round they get nothing, if the audience member wins they get £50 and a 'tongue roll' trophy to take home. the finale is the best celebrity vs the best audience member. if the former wins it's £5,000 to their chosen charity, if the latter wins it's a holiday to somewhere sunny for 4.
that's it. there are no other elements to the show other than the usual inane padding to stretch it out to 45 mins. however ... the gamble appears to pay off, with the show quickly gaining a following, regularly achieving viewing figures around 10 million.
as long as the viewing figures were sustained series in series out and this with no real format tweaks, do you think these broadcasters would keep on commissioning a show even though there is literally no substance to the format? in short and as per my title, would ratings win over (any) substance or would the main broadcasters kick tongue roll into the long grass after one series regardless of the viewing figures to maintain whatever credibility they still have?
the format, set in a studio in front of a live audience with one of the usual light entertainment presenters, sees various celebrities pitted against members of the studio audience. it's one on one, and the challenge is simply to see who can roll their tongue the best. each week sees 5 x celebrities pitted against 5 x members of the audience. the show airs on a saturday evening at 7pm on the broadcasters flagship channel. if the celebrity wins their round they get nothing, if the audience member wins they get £50 and a 'tongue roll' trophy to take home. the finale is the best celebrity vs the best audience member. if the former wins it's £5,000 to their chosen charity, if the latter wins it's a holiday to somewhere sunny for 4.
that's it. there are no other elements to the show other than the usual inane padding to stretch it out to 45 mins. however ... the gamble appears to pay off, with the show quickly gaining a following, regularly achieving viewing figures around 10 million.
as long as the viewing figures were sustained series in series out and this with no real format tweaks, do you think these broadcasters would keep on commissioning a show even though there is literally no substance to the format? in short and as per my title, would ratings win over (any) substance or would the main broadcasters kick tongue roll into the long grass after one series regardless of the viewing figures to maintain whatever credibility they still have?
0
Comments