Who Wants to Keep His Job?
Bruce McCall
The New Yorker, March 13, 2000
To: Programming Dept. N.Y.
From: Programming Head L.A.
So, O.K., I get to play Monday-morning coroner. "Who Wants to Have Sex with Some Hell's Angels?" failed, people, because nobody (anybody at Standards & Practices listening???) visited the set during dress rehearsal. Because leather photographs like muslin on TV. Because depravity-based TV shows shouldn't be broadcast on Sunday A.M.
Onward. Last night I O.K.'ed the speed-up of "Who's Up for Robbing an Armored Car?" to fill the sudden hole in the sweeps-week sked. (Don't forget to screen contestants for gun permits, I beg!) I know, it didn't focus-group as strong--despite the built-in freeway-chase viewership bonus--as "Who Wants to Mud-Wrestle Roseanne?," but the latter's production costs are so low that it'll end up bankrolling the first two episodes of "Who Wants to Hijack a Cruise Ship?" I've brought in Hy and Doris ("America's Bloodiest Emergency-Room Videos"). Heed their wisdoms. (Hy memos me re "Who Wants to Kidnap Bill Gates?" four simple words: "Make it Jennifer Lopez." Twenty extra Nielsen points.)
备忘录：谁不想被炒鱿鱼？
致： 纽约节目筹划部同仁
由： 洛杉矶节目筹划部主任
唉，得了，该我来打扫战场、收拾残局了。各位，《谁想和几个地狱天使黑帮分子做爱？》的失败，是因为——节目标准审查部的人士听好了！——彩排时没有人去视察鼓励，因为在电视上皮衣皮裤看起来像是廉价的薄布做的，还因为这样的低级趣味的节目就不应该放在周日的早上播出。
过去的就让它过去吧。昨晚，我批准加快制作《谁想抢劫一辆装甲运钞车？》，好填补我们在收视率评定周突然出现的节目空档。（千万别忘了审查参赛者的持枪执照，拜托了！）我也清楚在做观众试看调查的时候，这个节目尽管加上了高速公路警匪追逐的镜头，还是没有《谁想和那个胖名女人罗珊摔泥巴跤？》受欢迎。但后者制作费用极低，我们在那里挣到的钱足够可以拍摄头两集的《谁想劫持一艘豪华游轮？》。节目主持我请到了海伊和多丽丝。（他们主持过《美国最血腥的急诊室录像片段》。）他们有的是好点子。（海伊曾就《谁想绑架电脑巨人比尔·盖茨？》给我一个条子，上面只写着“改成性感女星詹妮弗·洛佩茨”。受视率上了二十点！）
But, people, whoa! I'm paid to be a skeptic, to think things like, Is the "who wants to" genre already in its out cycle? I'm not talking about retrenchment here. The people have voted: Wholesome, family-oriented, audience-interactive pornotainment--always, always with high production values--is today's No. 1 cultural snack food. We're just the Kozmo.com delivery guys. But the snacks can't arrive stale. Herewith a few mindprods:
Has anybody bothered checking out India TV's daytime ratings monster? F.Y.I.: Format, quiz show. Gimmick, wrong answers cost contestants their own money, homes, etc. Insight: U.S. has never had a prime-time personal-ruin-driven TV quizzer.
Amateur-transplant-surgery genre is hot. Who says so? Six solid proposals in last week say so. Yeah, I know it's a legal mosh pit. (Shoot offshore? Real surgeon on standby?)
Affiliates still feel double-crossed after net showed them but then never skedded "Kangaroo Court," our live tragedocuquiz. Let's relook at it. (Rename it "Twelve Angry Men" to nip the nature-show confusion?) Legal says tacking on a "Life is unfair" V.O. and super upfront would cover railroading-the-innocent issue like a cheap judge's robe.
但是，先生们，先别急！我的职责之一就是怀疑一切和多问问题。比如说，诸如“谁想”之类的节目是不是做到头了？我不是担心会少做，而是根本有没有得做。诚然，大众的喜好很明了：健康向上的、老少皆宜的、观众参与的黄色娱乐一直都非常、非常受欢迎，而今天，这样的节目更是最好的文化快餐，而我们只是送餐的伙计罢了。但问题是，餐盒送到时要热腾腾才对啊？下面是我的几个想法：
你们知不知道“印度电视”白天收视率最高的节目是什么？给你一点提示。形式：知识问答。特点：答错的人输掉自己的钞票、房子等等。思考：美国电视的黄金时段还没有一个这样致人于死地而后快的问答节目主持人。
“门外汉施行器官移植手术”看起来不错。为什么这么说？上星期就有六个有理有据的建议书送进来。不过，我承认这个东西合不合法很难讲。（到海外去拍如何？找真的外科医生护驾？）
《袋鼠法庭：私审私刑》是现场直播的“悲剧、纪实、问答”节目。总部给旗下的电视台看过样片，但又不安排播出，大家直呼上当。我看有必要重新考虑。（是否改名为《愤怒的陪审员》，以免与《动物世界》混淆？）法律部的意见是，节目开始时加上“人生有何公平可言”这样的字幕和配音，就不怕别人说我们陷害忠良了。
This is not to say that we should abandon the "who wants to" franchise, flat out. I mean, any competitor could snap it right up and milk it in its death throes. We need a fresh creative twist, like "Who Doesn't Want to . . .?" How about: "Who Doesn't Want to Have Diplomatic Immunity for a Day?" "Who Doesn't Want to Blow Up a Building?" I'm thinking this could Viagrafy the concept conceptually.
But the TV audience is treacherous. (Anybody remember "America's Most Shocking Autopsies"?) Moral: Look where not even cable has gazed before. Ask yourself, What's the network's liability exposure?--and work forward from there. As in "Who Wants to Bomb an Iraqi Missile Site?" That would be great TV and good citizenship, with zero chance of successful litigation.
A few other notions: "The 20,000 Volt Death Quiz." Gimmick: death-row inmate get a week's reprieve for every correct answer until . . . hey, you can calculate the odds as well as me. Who, people, could not tune in?
我也没说“谁想”之类的节目就从此不要做了。要不，别的电视网抢过去，一样会给它做烂、做死。不过，我们可以变变花样。“谁不想”怎么样？比如：《谁不想有哪怕一天的外交豁免权呢？》、《谁不想炸掉一座高楼呢？》。我想这样可以给这类题目在概念上注入一剂壮阳针。
要知道电视观众的口味变化无常。（《美国最令人恶心的尸体解剖》恐怕早被人遗忘了吧？）教训：走有线电视都不曾走过的路。问问你自己，本电视网的法律风险有多大，而后行事。比如《谁想去炸掉一个伊拉克的导弹发射基地？》，既好看又很爱国，还没有被人家告赢的可能性。
另外的想法：《两万伏高压生死问答》。诀窍：死刑犯答对一个问题就多活一个星期，直到……。输赢的概率你也会算啦！这样的节目谁会不看呢？
But, damn it, that only reminds me, "who wants to" is one haunting refrain. "Who Wants to Drive the Indy 500?" "Who Wants to Take Home a Fifty-Foot Anaconda?" Wrong. Those are too rural-unmarried-male-skewed. We've got to think big-target, not fragments. And yet, and yet. Maybe it was Ed Murrow who said that the joke's dead when Letterman stops telling it. Maybe "who wants to" is thresholding--has already thresholded, we just don't have instrumentation precise enough to measure it yet.
People, I have a Monday breakfast with the Chief, and I don't want "Who Wants My Job?" winning the exit poll. Here is one final large, large, large idea: Quiz format. Mega-bucks payoff. Contestants all brainy creeps, but gimmick is: make lo-empathy super-creeps take a dive and grease answers so single sympathetic creep keeps on winning until even more sympathetic creep comes along. People, how come I suddenly feel a whole helluvalot better about Monday b'fast???
不过，真是的，这又使我想到“谁想”主题也不是没有问题。《谁想赛车五百哩？》、《谁想带五十(口尺)巨蟒回家？》，不行吧，好像是给乡村光棍汉看的。我们要盯住大目标，而不是小玩意。AND YET, AND YET. 也许是埃德·墨若说的，那个名嘴雷特曼不再讲的笑话就没什么好笑的了。也许“谁想”节目盛极将衰，也许已经开始走下坡路了，只是我们没有那样的精密仪器去测试而已。
各位，星期一我要和总裁共进早餐，and I don't want "Who Wants My Job?" winning the exit poll. 这才是最后的、好大、好大、好大的点子：采用知识问答的形式，大把大把的钞票作奖励。参加者都是书呆子型的人物。方法是：让一个惹人同情的书呆子一直赢，其他那些讨厌的家伙都是做陪衬的，直到我们找到一个更惹人同情的书呆子。各位，我怎么一下子对星期一的早餐会感觉好多了？
Background: Quiz shows are all the rage on U.S. television, again: "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" on ABC, "Greed" on Fox and others. Fox, the most productive in churning out reality- or depravity-, according to this author, based shows, recently did a special called "Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire." Fifty candidates, selected from thousands of women around the country, strutted their stuff and sued for matrimony on live national television, while the elusive bachelor hid somewhere on stage and watched (what a creep!). The ratings skyrocketed and Fox scheduled for a rerun of the special but had to scuttle the plan when something not so innocent about the guy was exposed: he allegedly abused a former girlfriend.
我的猜想：
Monday-morning coroner: "There is much mayhem over the weekend and I'm the one to examine the damage."
sked: schedule mindprod: product of mind V.O.: voice-over super: superimposition
我的疑惑：
because nobody (anybody at Standards & Practices listening???) visited the set during dress rehearsal: Why would this cause the show's failure?
I'm not talking about retrenchment here: Did I treat it correctly?
Life is unfair: Is this a song?
And yet, and yet.
People, I have a Monday breakfast with the Chief, and I don't want "Who Wants My Job?" winning the exit poll. Here is one final large, large, large idea: Quiz format. Mega-bucks payoff. Contestants all brainy creeps, but gimmick is: make lo-empathy super-creeps take a dive and grease answers so single sympathetic creep keeps on winning until even more sympathetic creep comes along. People, how come I suddenly feel a whole helluvalot better about Monday b'fast???
What's the joke here?