 |
|
|
|
|
Candidates are good 'Survivors'
By Brian D. Rossman
On Wednesday, Aug. 16, 2000, two of the summer's most popular television events were broadcast. One program was scripted, with professional actors, and performed in Los Angeles. The other involved no direction, ordinary people, and was shot far from Hollywood on the other side of the world.
Ironically, one was billed as a news event, the other as entertainment. However, after watching both the Democratic National Convention and Survivor, I was hard-pressed to decide which one was real and which was fiction. Or, more importantly, whether they were the penultimate episodes of the same drama.
CBS's Survivor website describes the concept like this: "16 castaways will be marooned on a tropical island. They will be forced to band together and carve out a new existence, using their collective wits to make surviving, without any conveniences of the modern world, a little easier. Week by week, one by one, the tribe shrinks until at the end of the final episode, only one survivor remains. The lone survivor will walk away with $1,000,000."
This 39-day quest is shown over 13 weekly episodes. On Aug. 16, the twelfth (and second to last) episode aired.
The concept for the Survivor program sounded eerily familiar to the concept of the presidential campaign.
The Campaign 2000 website would describe the concept as follows, "Starting with 8 candidates from each party. These castaways will be forced to band together and attack the front runner, each other, or the other party in order to survive.
At their disposal, they have all the conveniences of the modern world, including operatives and soft money to make surviving a little easier. Week by week, one by one, the field shrinks until the end of the final episode (election night) only one survivor remains. The lone survivor will walk away with a $200,000 annual salary and the title of leader of the free world."
This 16-month quest is spotlighted during a four-day miniseries called The Convention. On Wednesday, Aug. 16, the second to the last day of the Convention was shown.
If these two shows were competing with each other for ratings, what would happen if we combined the best aspects from each? What if we inserted the presidential candidates into Survivor program? The skill sets involved are very similar.
This combination programming would assist the media tremendously. Having spent the last year handicapping the presidential race (Bradley v. Gore, McCain v. Bush, Gore v. Bush), the media is now spending its time handicapping the race to the last Survivor (Richard v. Rudy, Sue v. Kelly, Richard v. Sue). Combining both shows would free up the media for other stories.
Additionally, this solution would alleviate the country's campaign finance dilemma.
Since candidates would be prohibited from bringing items on the island beyond those needed for their daily sustenance, their advertising and public relations budgets would be eliminated. Clearly, they would be left to differentiate themselves through their positions rather than their pollsters.
Accordingly, in this "mano a mano" environment, there would be more opportunity for diversity among the candidates. If the Survivor model was the format to select a president, the front runners might look a lot different than Gore and Bush. Gen. Colin Powell would be a good bet to survive. Former Navy SEAL Jesse Ventura would give everyone a run for the money. Nobody should discount "Fighting" John McCain, but with his temper, he might be voted off the island quickly.
My bet would be Hillary Clinton--the soon-to-be-former first lady. Now that is a survivor.
|
|
|
|
Sunnyvale, California Since 1994
