"Big Brother" And The Web

For years, big media outlets have feasted on the idea that the Net is a breeding ground for thieves and degenerates who prey on innocent youth. This generally false impression has panicked a whole generation of parents about technology, resulting in the hysterical jailing and persecution of some hackers, and triggered the installation of blocking and filtering systems on home computers, as well as many purchased with federal money. So it's especially interesting to see a new level of media hypocrisy: a major network -- CBS -- using the Web as a dumping ground for leftover trash (in this case, from the show "Big Brother") too offensive to broadcast over the air. Next will be shootings, accidents and executions.

Last week, CBS expelled a male contestant from the reality show Big Brother for holding a kitchen knife against a female contestant's throat. The 26-year-old man, warned previously about threatening behavior, was kicked off the show, whose producers concede they sought out more aggressive contestants this year to boost the program's ratings. CBS can air what it wants, of course, but here's a neat twist: Though the knife-wielder has been deemed too violent to remain on the program, the incident was aired on TV and live online, with additional footage available at extra cost on the Web. The network is selling around-the-clock views from all the cameras in the "Big Brother" home -- more than TV viewers can see -- to Net users for a $10 a month fee.

If you each had pocketed $10 every time CBS News broadcast an online danger story about hackers, intellectual property thieves, the violent effects of gaming, online predators or child pornographers, you could retire. This is the network whose 60 Minutes aired an hour-long program the week after Columbine titled "Are Video Games Turning Your Kids Into Killers?" Big media have been among the leading advocates of the idea that the Net is a dangerous, de-civilizing place for children, that they will encounter all sorts of violent, sexually explicit and other unwholesome material there.

But when I went onto the Big Brother site, I found no age restrictions or warnings about who could buy or see the knife incident. Any kid with access to a credit card could, as is often true of sex and other "unwholesome" sites online. But it's one thing for a pornographer to do that, another a media conglomerate that purports to cover public policy issues, including technology, and that constantly spouts the most high-minded sense of moral purpose. Listen to what Big Brother's producer said of the show's ethics: "I have been lecturing my staff about using the West Point code of honor in making sure we keep to the truth."

The blurring of news, information and entertainment has been underway for years, but the use of the Net as a profit center for trash programming is very new to so-called serious news organizations. The real danger to kids going online is that they will soon have no way of differentiating entertainment from factual information.

The next level seems clear: to round up convicted murders and psychopaths and have them tear one another up, then sell the grisly pictures over the Web to anybody with $10. Maybe fires, traffic accidents, shootings, or the next federal and state executions could be broadcast that way, too, a new revenue source for embattled popular media. Believe me, it will happen.

Big Brother is already cheesy trash; now it's clearly exploiting the possibility of violence to draw viewers. It's also using the Net to cash in on crap the network doesn't dare broadcast on it's publically-owned airwaves. This notion of the Net as a target-marketed toxic waste dump for dubious content is significant, particularly if it makes money and other networks and giant content producers like Disney, or AOL/Time-Warner adopt it. It's not hard to imagine a scenario where the most ubiqutious producers of dubious content for kids are the big media companies that can produce this garbage with one division, while condemning the immoral impact of new technology with another.

Maybe when some pompous Congressional gasbag like Joseph Lieberman next holds hearings about violence on TV and the Net, he can call in a CBS executive and ask him or her if their vision of the Net and ask if the networks' vision is to use cyberspace as a medium for profiting from content not fit for commercial broadcasting. The committee can also ask if, in the news division's next report on online depredations, Dan Rather will include his companys own entertainment division. Don't hold your breath.

Comments

10 To 1 Odds That In The Near Future....

[BRock97]

...the movie The Running Man will become reality. Why not? If this kind of trash is so popular in this day and age, how low can the American television audience go? I could see it now, gather a group of rough and tough guys and gals on death row. Promise the winner life while the others would die. The jail system wins, the viewers win. It would be a blast. Plus, every year, you could get the top ten winners and have a pay-per-view event. I bet McMahon would be all over that. For my money, the Net is much more wholesome.

Bryan R.

Re:Been done.

[BRock97]

Stile Project. 'Nuff said.

Dude, dude, dude!!!! Next time you post a link to a porn site, give those of us at work an indication that's what it is!!!! Damn, I am sure some red light went off somewhere just now....

Bryan R.

Re:Isn't that a bit selfish?

[Tackhead]

> The reason [the guy who threatened to knife a contestant] was expelled was because he's a danger to everyone on the show, and a possible PR nightmare for CBS. I mean, a murder/assault on a reality show?

Yeah, God forbid we show 'em reality on a reality show.

(Personally, I disagree. I'd be willing to bet the CBS execs collectively creamed their Armani suits when the near-knifing happened, until the CBS legal department showed them that they'd be sued into the stone age if they knowingly allowed a contestant to be murdered/assaulted. Whereupon, the execs then shat their pants, turfed the contestant, and gave some New York dry cleaner a Very Bad Day.)

Web feed keeping CBS in check?

[RedX]

Contrary to what Jon stated, the actual knife incident was *not* broadcast on the TV show. The events leading up to that point were shown, but the clip ended just prior to the knife being placed to the throat. Had this event not been shown over the Internet to viewers as it happened, you have to wonder if CBS would have even bothered to boot this contestant. Heck, the other houseguests *still* don't know that this happened as the female involved in the incident hasn't mentioned one word about it to anyone, either because she was so drunk that she doesn't remember it or because she didn't think it was a big deal. In fact, she cried for a few days after this guy was booted because she says that he treated her better than any other guy she's known (she's been married twice). IMO, CBS removed this guy only as damage control knowing that the incident was being broadcast across the Internet and that the media would have a field day with yet another reason to bash the show. And don't think that the Internet broadcast is uncensored. There have been many, many instances where the feed is either cut or switched to a different camera when "controversial" situations arise.

no warning? then what the heck is THIS? ...

[atomic brainslide]

http://www.real.com/partners/bigbrother2/?src=cb sa ds

The live and on-demand content (the "Content") may contain elements offensive to some users and inappropriate for users under 21. Certain Content may be delayed, edited and/or blacked out at various times at our sole discretion. You agree that we shall have no liability whatsoever relating to the Content and you waive any claims you may have, now or in the future, against us relating to the Content. You agree to comply with our Terms of Service.

That's a pretty bold warning, i don't know how Katz missed THAT one... oh wait.

Censorship and age...

[fmaxwell]

What may be happening here is that the networks are realizing that the web is an interactive medium while TV is not. While a scene may be too upsetting, violent, or graphically sexual to broadcast into every living room that's tuned in, it may be reasonable to allow someone to see that scene if they so choose to do so online.

I also do not feel that it is the web site's responsibility to raise your children. If your under-18 year old kid steals a credit card and uses it to buy access to a web site, it's not the web site's job to police your child. Jon's chastisement of the web site for not having age restrictions is ludicrous. How many kids who steal credit cards are going to click on the I-am-not-old-enough-to-view-this button?

That being said, the scene in question holds no fascination for me and I find it offensive that the show filmed it rather than intervening on behalf of the young woman. But it's not my place to determine what should, and should not, appear on someone else's screen. If that's what they want to see, so be it. The networks should have the freedom to put what they want on their web sites, for free or for profit, and the market should decide whether it stays or goes.

Parellels

[ColGraff]

Oh yah, I loved that novella. Parellels:
In "The Running Man", the world is horribly polluted, and air pollution is killing people, but the government simply pretends there is no problem. Sound familiar?
In "The Running Man", thousands of people line up for the chance to degrade themselves on a variety of game shows for the amusement of a sadistic audience. So it is today.
In "The Running Man", a huge corporation is at least as powerful as the government. In the real world, large corporations and special interest groups wield enormous power over elected officials, with campaign contributions, etc.