Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, March 19, 1995 TAG: 9503180035
SECTION: EXTRA PAGE: 1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: CODY LOWE
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Sure we've got crime, drug abuse, child abuse, spouse abuse, an overloaded national economy. And those are bad. We ought to do something about them.
But most of us are relatively unaffected by those.
I'm amazed that those politicians have neglected one of the most powerful indicators of just how sick our society really is - the number of television and radio talk-show hosts.
Trust me, my tongue is edged ever so slightly toward the gum, but it is not in my cheek.
Let's just look in this newspaper's daily TV listings. A full column's worth of talk-show listings appears every weekday.
There are Regis and Kathie Lee, Donahue, Richard Bey, Leeza, Jerry Springer, Mike and Maty, Jenny Jones, Susan Powter, Geraldo, Montel Williams, Charles Perez, Ricki Lake, Sally Jessy Raphael, Oprah Winfrey, Larry King, Charles Grodin, Charlie Rose, Rush Limbaugh, Jon Stewart and Maury Povich. And that list doesn't include the more traditional Today Show and Tonight Show interviews. It doesn't include the gaggle of would-be talk-show stars waiting in the wings with even more babble to hawk - Lauren Hutton, Rolanda, George and Alana, Gordon Elliott, Marilu, and who knows how many quickly cancelled shows such as Suzanne Somers'.
Most have always played heavily on human tragedy and good old fashioned prurient interests. At least the Playboy channel doesn't tiptoe around pornography, it just tries to satisfy the desire for it.
The talkers, though, for the most part would have us believe they only book "hookers who are good mothers and wish they were nuns" because of a selfless interest in improving society. Yeah, right.
Some would argue that the shows do a service airing once taboo subjects or that they simply reflect society. I don't buy it.
Sure, not all of them pick the sleaziest kinds of topics, but they consistently - as a genre - select topics and guests designed to appeal to the worst in us. This is a service?
Listen to some of the topics from one recent day's talk schedule: "`bad' girls whose acquaintances or families think they are too wild, obnoxious or trampy for their own good"; "people have the opportunity to fulfill their fantasies"; "Mothers who want their overweight daughters to adopt a healthier lifestyle. Guest: fitness expert [?] Richard Simmons"; " Women who say that their preteen daughters are trying to act much older than they are"; " Women who say their mothers-in-law are destroying their marriages"; " Women accuse relatives of stealing their mates."
Notice how often the people exploited for the sake of ratings are women.
But for a twist, Jenny Jones recently decided to manipulate men. How about a show that exposes men to their secret admirers - in particular, male secret admirers?
Sounds like a winner. Homosexuality has a demonstrated titillation factor that's been exploited by everybody from Rush Limbaugh to Donahue. Actually, Limbaugh probably talks about it even more than Donahue, but that's a topic for another column.
So the ``Jenny Jones'' producers drag some apparently unsuspecting schmuck out on stage and - before what would have been a national television audience - tell him that he's the object of an acquaintance's homosexual crush.
LIberals might argue that shouldn't bother the guy. If he wasn't interested, he just says "thanks, but no thanks" and that's the end of that.
But the Jones show producers knew that wasn't likely to happen. Some type of dramatic reaction was anticipated. The guy could be delighted, but - more likely - he might be outraged. Either one is great for ratings, you see.
In recent years, Jones and her producers have said she resents being lumped in with other talk-show hosts who'll do any sleazy old thing to get ratings.
Even after their surprised guest later shot and killed the man who expressed his affections on a television stage, Jones' producers insisted they had done nothing wrong.
Participants were told ahead of taping that their secret admirer could be "a man or a woman. No one was lied to, no one was misled." Nevertheless, for the time being, they've decided not to air the show.
Perhaps that has helped Ms. Jones sleep better these last few nights.
Clearly, such an incident is no justification for one person to take another's life. And we have to remember that the man accused of shooting his would-be suitor has pleaded innocent to the murder charge.
But my guess is that once that criminal trial is over, Jenny Jones and company will be asked to take the stand in a civil suit for millions of dollars in damages for pain and suffering. There might even be two families jumping on that wagon.
Despite Jones' denial of responsibility, this ought to be a clear call to all the other talk show companies in the country to rethink how they do business.
It is, after all, a business, not a public service. None of those shows makes money without an audience - and that is us.
More of us ought to tell them what we think of their rubbish by refusing to watch it.
I just doubt that many of us will.
by CNB