Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
The network that brought you "Whacked Out Videos" and "Ninja Warrior" and "Cheaters," has a new reality show in the works. It's called "Bomb Patrol: Afghanistan," and it will, with the U.S. military's blessing, follow an American explosive ordnance disposal team as they risk lives trying to disarm bombs.
Last night on the show, guest Frank Rich pointed out that the Pentagon has signed on for this kind of thing before. The military teamed up with super-producer Jerry Bruckheimer on "Tales from the Front Lines," another reality show based in Afghanistan.
If it's true that the prospect of things going wrong is the main allure of reality shows, then in this case the lure, really, is the prospect of American casualties. "I feel sorry for these men and women who are going to be portrayed in a kind of a snuff movie quality that's depressing," Rich tells us.
Another viewer made a different comparison. "The Roman emperor built the Colosseum and gladiators to distract the public as the conspirators," @zoomarang writes. "Today reality tv."
You?
Leave a Comment:
I hate to see something so serious get the reality show treatment.
On the other hand... The Pentagon's going to be looking over their shoulders. It will, presumably, be harder to pull the usual reality show creative editing for fun and profit. And maybe some people who wouldn't otherwise have tuned in to coverage of the war will get a good look at what it's really like on the front lines. Maybe it'll get people talking about the war, get it some of the attention it's long needed. Sad as it is, this might just be the best way to reach those audiences.
Gut feeling says this is awful. A new low for reality TV. And that's saying something. But, stepping back... it might just be for the best.
Rather ironic, really, if it turns out that G4, which is generally dedicated to video games, turns out to be a vehicle for getting people to stop thinking about the war in remote terms and start seeing the real, human side of it.
The whole thing is just sick. I can't imaging watching something so horrifying ("Hurt Locker" was enough for me, and that was just a movie). How can they think the idea of possibly watching our troops getting killed is entertainment? I really really hope the whole thing gets shelved before it airs, maybe with enough pressure and outrage it will be.
This proposed bomb squad "reality show" is callous, and disrespectful to those that place their lives on the line for their fellow sailors, soldiers, and airman.
I am a U.S. Navy veteran, and a mother of a son who just returned from Iraq on Aug 14Th, his second tour there. I can not imagine watching such a "reality show" and witnessing one of his fellow men/women in arms blow up live on t.v. Worse yet, I and other parents, spouses, children would be horrified, traumatized to witness their son, daughter, spouse, father, mother go up in smoke, wounded, or killed "LIVE" OR in a VIDEO-TAPED and broadcast on a "reality show". This is barbaric, disrespectful, and I fear, demonstrates the disintegration of our morals and ethnics as a society and de-values human life.
Rachel, Please post and/or announce on your show a POC where one can email or call in our disgust and disagreement with the Navy's decision to allow this.
One possibility is contacting your Congressional Representative and Senators. Calling their offices is much more effective than writing.
I don't Watch the Reality Shows, but Watching Someone Barfing in a Taxi or Watching B-- tcy & Jealous Housewives Ruining a Perfect Dinner is One Thing--- But Seeing American Soldiers Killed on TV???? This is Sick!
Like Rachel Maddow Said, " PPL are Just Waiting--- and Cannot Wait to See the Incidental Disasters Going Wrong"---- This is So Sick!
The US Navy Approving This?? I Really Not am Totally Shocked, Do They Like the "Shock Value"?
Diana B
Yeah, that's pretty disturbing.
If a fake bomb squad can get you an Oscar, then a real bombsquad... Somehow that just doesn't add up. The only positive I could glean from this is the possibility of viewers gaining an appreciation of the danger and horror of such a conflict. However, that definitely isn't how it's being packaged, and even if it were I doubt that's the effect it would have.
Last I heard, reality TV shows' first priority was not an accurate depiction of events.
I think there is a misunderstanding about what reality television actually is. Shows like The Real Housewives Of... and what not have taken the name "reality" and put a spin on it that is otherwise inaccurate. Reality television just means it is filming (or at least is supposed to film) situations without a script. News reels you see of accidents are reality television. The television show Cops is reality television. The documentary Carrier is a reality show about the US Navy (and I recommend you watch it if you're curious about what it's like to be in the Navy...it's through PBS just type Carrier in the search engine). There is likely not going to be any scrip; they will likely just film what is happening and edit to omit information that might be dangerous to have broadcast on public air waves (for instance they probably won't go into detail about the defusing segments of EOD). I also want everyone to take a step back and re-exam your comments from a neutral perspective, rather than from your gut. Americans have had the luxury of fighting wars without having to bear the consequences of those wars. It is the military personnel and the families who suffer through war. You and I, as civilians who have never served, will not bear any consequence for Iraq or Afghanistan except in the remotest of senses (like the national debt). Stating that "It's horrific to think about them showing a blown up soldier" shows how distant you are from the war. Why exactly is it that you feel that the soldier is the only person who should have to face such horrors? Ask yourself that. Why is it wrong for you, the American who sent her to war, to have to witness what it's like to see a 20 year old killed in the line of duty? They are doing this for you and you owe it to them to bear at least some of the cost. I admit if the show uses the typical, distasteful drumming up that you see in reality shows like Jersey Shore then it will be horribly disgusting. But if this is something more like Carrier where you're watching what it's like to be on the front lines- then you should have to watch it. Why? Not because it's "entertaining" but because you should have to bear the consequence of war. It is absolutely hypocritical of the American people to state that war is OK, but then get offended anytime they see a wounded soldier or a dead soldier. If you don't want to see it then don't put our men and women in harms way. And if you are going to put them in harms way, then don't bitch about the consequences of that choice.
I think I need to expand on my comment just a wee bit after reading it through. I'm trying to say that the context with which it is presented is the determining factor as to whether or not this is abhorrent. If they present this show in the whole "Up next a soldier comes face to face with death" type fashion, that's deplorable. But if they are just documenting what it's like to be on the ground, in similar fashion to a show like Cops, then there's nothing wrong with it. I don't feel like I made that clear in my previous post.
very well stated....i think you just convinced me.....
I think you are giving tv producers too much credit.
Here's a better reference to what I'm trying to say:
If the show is handled like the short-lived series Survival School then I will find it deplorable (as I did that show). Survival School follows 2 teams of Air Force personnel as they go through SEAR school. I would've liked the show, which was also a reality show based on the US military, except that there was a running narrative and the producers kept trying to gin up controversy. The announcer would come on and try to gin up "excitement" for the show by talking about the periles that the USAF teams were in. There's a segment in one of the episodes where one of the cadets goes into shock from temperature and risks hypothermia. The narrator, in the episode before, goes to great lengths to gin up excitement for this episode by running "teaser trailors" about what you'd see next week. THAT to me is digusting. http://www.hulu.com/survival-school; http://www.hulu.com/watch/40561/survival-school-episode-6#s-p1-so-i0; http://www.hulu.com/watch/40559/survival-school-episode-7#s-p1-so-i0.
However, this reality show based on the US Navy was done with great taste and is one of the best documentaries about the US military out there. It also won an Emmy: http://www.pbs.org/weta/carrier/ This is a reality series done about a deployment aboard the USS Nimitz to Iraq that took place in 2005. There is no running narrative; people from all different walks of life are allowed to express their views and complaints. It shows the good, the bad, the ugly. Never once in advertising this series did PBS try to gin up excitment, nor are there attempts to do so by anyone on the production staff. It tries, in the best of terms, to show all sides of the story. One of the escorting battle cruisers in this series loses a sailor, and yet no where in the series or in the advertising of said series did you have people coming on TV going "Tune in this week to hear about the sailor who died!"
There's a big difference between the two and all I'm saying is that the release statement by G4 doesn't seem to indicate what direction they are going in. One is deplorable, one is not. http://www.hollywood.com/news/G4_Making_A_Hurt_Locker_Inspired_Reality_Series/7140772
I think we both know that there is a vast difference between PBS and commercial networks, broadcast or cable. PBS doesn't need to gin up excitement for their programs, as they aren't looking for advertisers. They have underwriters for their programs, and for "Carrier" and other programs, I have seen defense contractors like LockMart, Boeing and others underwriting a program. Of course, they also get government funding, as well as money from viewers. In other words, they don't get money based on how many viewers they pull in. On the other hand, commercial channels depend solely on advertising revenue, and a show done in a low-key way like "Carrier" wouldn't bring in nearly as many viewers as shows that hype danger. Just look at "Ice Road Truckers" or "Deadliest Catch", for example. The commercials emphasize the danger, often by making skillful edits of show footage in order to make it seem like something really bad happened that simply didn't. For example, recently on "Ice Road Truckers", part of the commercial stated in breathless tones, "There will be blood on the ice!", over a quick video clip of an unidentifiable man covered with blood from a head wound. Immediately, you are led to believe that one of the truckers has suffered a serious injury, and you want to tune in to see if your favorite trucker gets hurt. Of course, it turns out to be some random civilian that has had an accident. Would PBS have advertised it like that? No, because they don't need to.
I see absolutely nothing good about this show, and I hope it fails miserably and dies a swift death. If people want to know what it's like in Afghanistan, there are plenty of great documentaries out there, which tell the story without sensationalizing it, or using soldiers as tools that may end up as "celebrities".
Well I guess I'm looking at it as we don't know yet if they will. You are correct though, if they pull the same bull like they did in Survival School (which you are correct that it was a network show done by the Military Channel who is a Discovery Channel affiliate and not done under the same pre-tense as Carrier) then I won't watch it and hope it dies a quick death. Carrier is a great documentary series, it's one of my favorite. I don't want to knock anyone who is trying to bring forward to light the front lines- but neither do I support the whole "let's talk about how cool it is when someone gets blown up," bs. I think as Americans we should have to see videos of that but not from the perspective of trying to make it "cool" or "macho." I think it's horrible that we send people into these wars and then wave our hands and frail any time pictures come out that remind us that people die in wars. Remember that picture with the Associated Press that got so much controversy? The reporter accidentally caught images of a US Marine who had been hit by an RPG and then continued to take pictures of him dying. The first thing people did was talk about how we can't show images like that to the American public. Why? Because god help us if we realize that this is what happens when we give money to private contractors? I guess that's the position I'm coming from. If this is done tastefully I think it could be positive- but if is done with that whole Deadliest Catch mentality then you're absolutely right that it shouldn't be aired.
I have absolutely no faith in a tv producer who is selling a show to a commercial channel to show any kind of restraint or common decency...to do so would risk him not making the sale in the first place.
The people who seem most squeamish about showing military casualties are repubs. Witness the absolute refusal of the Bush administration to allow cameras into Dover AFB to photograph the returning caskets of service members killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Their excuse was that it was an invasion of privacy for the families of the KIA, but when family members spoke out and said they would not obect, they changed their tune and said that it might offend ANY family members who had lost someone in the wars. Their real fear was that seeing the bodies return would make the wars unpopular at home, making it harder to get funding to continue them year after year, which would really hurt their defense contractor buddies.
Personally, I think their fears were overblown, as usual. This nation is so desensitized to human suffering that even the deaths of over 1000 of our citizens in New Orleans during Katrina didn't have any lasting effect. The city is still suffering, it took a monumental effort to even take a case to court against the police officers who shot those unarmed folks on the bridge in NO, and it hasn't made such a disaster any less likely than it was 5 years ago. Will showing soldiers being killed achieve anything? You know they most likely wouldn't show that, but even if they actually did, it would be the equivalent of a snuff film, televised to millions each week. The public sees worse than that in horror and action films every day, and I believe that seeing it on a tv screen will make those deaths in Afghanistan no more real than a scene from "Predator" or "Nightmare on Elm Street". We are a violent nation, with thousands killed each year in gun violence, auto accidents and other horrific events. If seeing your neighbor get blown away in a robbery isn't enough to make you get up off your ass and work to get some real gun control, how is watching a soldier you never met die on tv going to make you want to end the war?
I hope it bombs.
Figuratively or literally? Not a phrase I would have used.
I know the police officers are different from troops, and that troops are doing a lot more dangerous of a job, but this seems like it would be a show that is just COPS, but of the troops and not of police officers in American Cities.
Police officers get shot and killed and die on the job all the time -- no one raised a fuss about COPS when it aired on FOX for the first time over 20 years ago.
Is it because its troops that people are freaking out? Unless G4 tries to make the show entertaining by putting in music and snap edits and stuff, the show won't be entertaining in the same breath that watching a woman flip over a table is entertaining. Like having a camera crew embedded with police officers, the show is more likely meant to show what this group of soldiers do on an every day basis and how their lives are impacted by it. The reason people are freaking out is because it has now garnered a reality show tag to it, and because it is airing on G4. If it was airing as part of a documentary series on MSNBC, do you think such a fuss would have been raised?
This is totally reprehensible on so many different levels. As others have pointed out, people will be watching in the sick hope that something will go wrong and a soldier will be killed or injured. I guess staring at accident victims by the side of the road just isn't enough blood for them any more. Let's also not forget that the military is doing this because they see some benefit accruing to them. Their thinking is that this will be good PR for them showing brave soldiers laying down their lives for America. They are hoping that will increase support back home for an increasingly unpopular war, bringing with it more recruits and more money in their budgets. Hey, if a few soldiers have to die or get maimed, it's all for the greater good, right? And of course the show's producers are hoping to mine a bit of gold from the death and mayhem too. I can see it now....a soldier and a film crew show up at the door of a family whose son was filmed being killed while defusing an IED. "M'aam, we regret to inform you that your son died in Afghanistan while defending America....but the good news is that we got a 10 share, and he's a real star!"
The argument that if we see this carnage, we might be less likely to send our young men and women off to war sounds good, but then, have other reality shows had any effect in changing attitudes? Has endless seasons of "Cops" or "Worst Car Crashes" or "Deadliest Police Chases" done a single thing to decrease drunk driving or reckless behavior behind the wheel?
If this abomination of a program ever sees the light of day, it will be yet another stain on America, a bloodstain that like MacBeth, we will never be able to wash off, no matter how hard we try. Out, out, damned spot, indeed.
On the other hand, the troops express that regular Americans don't know and don't care about what's going on over there, and I think that those sensitive video game kids are really going to respond to this. If you want the average American to be exposed to/care about something, make a TV show. Yeah, it SUCKS over there, and there are plenty of kids that aren't paying any attention. So, at the very least, this will drum up some knowledge and sympathy for some men and women who could really use it.
Maybe they come home, and the welcome wagon is a little bigger. That's not a bad thing, regardless of how it's achieved.
And I seriously doubt you'll be seeing any of our people die on TV, because that really is trashy. If someone dies, I would expect there to be more on everyone else's feelings, so you could feel like he/she was your team member, and everyone watching would know what a great person they were, and how sorely they will be missed.
I personally think this is a good idea... personally. Our troops are going to be celebrities, and people are going to care about who they are, and where they came from, and hopefully the kids watching it will grow up and take care of the troops better than the last generation.
A reality show is not the way to tell people what it is like in Afghanistan. As someone else noted, the footage will be heavily edited, for "dramatic content", as they like to say, so you will be getting a highly stylized look at a soldier's life. Anything truly shocking enough to penetrate the action-movie-saturated mind of the American viewer will definitely be edited out. People are laying out $10 a head to watch Piranha 3-D, which has far more blood and gore and gratuitous violence than this proposed reality show will have. So, do you honestly think this will change the attitude of the public in any way?
Our troops are going to be celebrities? Is that a good idea? Is that what America is all about now, creating reality show celebrities? That is a weak justification for this program. As I said before, why is this show being filmed? Because the military sees benefit in it, both in recruiting and budgetary terms, as they hope that it will bolster support back home for an unpopular war. The producers see it as a moneymaker. So what do the troops get out of it? Celebrity status? They are being used, pure and simple. It apparently wasn't bad enough that we send them off to risk their lives, deployment after deployment, until they are killed or maimed, while their families are torn apart by the stress and strain of those deployments. Nooooooooo....we need to film these guys and gals all the time as they risk their lives, all in the name of the mighty dollar. Sick and disgusting. Just when I thought we couldn't sink any lower, we find a way to surprise even ourselves.
Reality tv is an excuse for no talent (tv). The US military that are in the field are very talented at their jobs. People have always felt the need for blood .......many will watch this 'reality' show hoping to see carnage, for them there can be no excuse. Others may watch the show to see what really happens in the field, I hope that was the path of reason the Navy took when they signed off.
Given that the episodes are not going to be shown live, much editing and reshooting can be done ......it is just sad that this is what people want to see!
Someone here (koolgiy) said that 'no one raised a fuss about COPS'. I am not sure if anyone raised a fuss about the show but many many jurisdictions forbid their police to participate in the show ....some police forces that have been involved in the show, were later ordered to cease and desist all involvement, usually after innocent people are killed. In an east coast state several years ago a teenage girl was killed by a cop in a high speed chase where the cop was pursuing a driver for speeding. The speeder was not going nearly as fast as the cop that lost control and killed the girl. When questioned the cop said that he was doing an episode for COPS and he had the cameras in his car, he didn't actually think he would crash like that or that anyone would get hurt. One child is dead, one family is devastated, one man sits behind bars. They didn't air all that. I guess that didn't make for such great tv!
One sentance: American idol with explosives!
Remember the movie 'Network,' we asked for this, and we got it. "Get up out of your chairs, got to your windows, and.............."
Dear G4, This is absolutely horrifying and obscene. What are you asking viewers to tune in to see? Our brave men and women in uniform competently doing a dangerous job under adverse circumstances for little pay, or to see someone maimed or killed for your profit? Let's be honest now...do people watch NASCAR to see cars turning left or to see them crash? Among the hundreds of hardships that our military personnel and returning veterans have to face, PLEASE do not this degradation to the list. Cancel this show before it airs and you have to "decide" whether or not to air a video of one of the bravest humans of the face of this earth being maimed (or even more horrifyingly, killed) in the service of his country to earn your channel advertising dollars.
One word: Rollerball
Intervention and Rollerballl at the same time!
Correction: G4 is not the "network that brought you Cheaters." Cheaters is a syndicated TV show. The other two you mention - yes, those are exclusive to G4.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0270118/
Also worth noting: it looks like - at least based on comments there - that most G4 viewers are not interested.
http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/707093/G4-Announces-Groundbreaking-New-Series-Bomb-Patrol-Afghanistan.html
And last thing - G4 is a Comcast channel. If the merger between NBC Universal and Comcast is allowed to happen...well, you get the idea, I think.
Well put, Spekkio.
Yeah, NASCAR meets The Hurt Locker.
There's reader here where I work who was (he's now in the reserves) a British Army Royal Engineers bomb disposal unit officer (Captain) I just had lunch with him (with our usual crowd of readers)and told him about this show. He looked at me shocked silence. Nuf said.
Ninja Warrior is some of the best athletic competition shown on TV. It completely rocks. Don't put it in the same category as that other garbage. As for this show, it's just another bad idea for a TV show that will stir some reaction for a little while, and then disappear and be forgotten. As it should be.
But did I mention that Ninja Warrior completely rocks? It's the only show I watch with my 13 year old son.
This concept is SO WRONG in so many ways... I can't imagine the type of minds that came up with this and justify in some way. As a Marine Viet Nam veteran that spent, all-together, five years of my life involved in that "war," if anyone had tried to make a show for TV like this, we'd have done our best to turn them into statistics in more ways than you can think of. This is ludicrous. This is supposed to be a country based on basic freedoms, but it seems to me that there should be someway the Pentagon, at least, would just laugh and say NO!
Why would the Pentagon say no to this? They see it as good PR, a chance to boost enlistment and their annual budget. It's the same reason they allow reporters to be embedded with troops. Every poll shows that more people are against our continued involvement in Afghanistan than are for it. If that trend is not reversed, it doesn't take a genius to see that the orders will eventually come from the White House to shut things down and bring the troops home. Secretary Gates is already saying that it is inevitable that the Pentagon will face some major budget cuts, something they haven't seen in decades. Since 9-11, the spigots have been wide open, pouring money into the Pentagon's coffers, no questions asked. So, in the end, the only way to counteract that is to show the public that our brave soldiers are doing vital work in Afghanistan, and that they need to stay there and get more money and equipment to do that work. Either that, or start a new war against another enemy. Iran, anyone?
The Iran issue does have me worried @Uffda. Anyone catch the Colbert Report?
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/351572/august-24-2010/jeffrey-goldberg
He talks about that we have a year before a decision is made....
I'm pretty much appalled at this idea. If what one poster said is true, that 'G4, which is generally dedicated to video games', it's worse than a bad idea. Fantasy and games is just not the right way to contextualize war, nor is cartoon violence the right surroundings for the real risk of death and maiming. The only possible good I can find is that it might make some of the soldiers celebrities. Might.
I'd like to say something about the bread and circuses comment in the original post article. The way I see it, a more accurate comparison would be the war in Iraq itself. That might have been a government strategy to distract people from problems here at home, but even more disturbing is that it was part of a plan to create a permanent enemy, like the Communists during the Cold War, that could soak up what money was left after the tax cuts reduced government income, putting social programs at risk.
The 1970's film "Network" was SOOOOOO far ahead of it's time...
This is really a sad statement about us as a people. That some TV person-in order to make a buck-came up with this idea thinking that there are people out there that would not only watch the show-but purchase the DVD set. All he's gotta do is dress it up as some tribute to our fighting men and women and his idea is golden.
This is one of the most repugnant ideas for a television show imaginable. Is this what we've come to now? A show to titillate some stay at home wannabe slackers?
As a student at Naval Officer Candidate School we watched a ton of these documentaries. Most of what we saw was classified and depicted Naval tragedies. We were there to learn and it was an extremely effective tool. I will never forget the images of sailors on a burning aircraft carrier, trying to save each other and the ship. A lot of them didn't make it. I have tears in my eyes right now thinking about it and it's been 35 years. Every minute of every day in the military is a sacrifice and it can quickly become the ultimate sacrifice. They need to have their story told. I trust the Navy to do this right.
I understand where you are coming from Mary but this is a commercial endeavor and as such commercial time (advertisements) will have to be sold to finance it. Are you okay with that? As a civilian I am not okay with that. Please let me know what you think.
One more thought. People need to see what war is like. This has been the most bloodless war we've had. We only see some vague action shots and a photo the the deceased in a clean, starched uniform in front of the flag. Until recently, we were not even permitted to see the coffins coming home. Bush said out of respect to the families. BS! Rows of caskets lined up in a hangar is too graphic. I don't think we are going to see unedited footage of bomb explosions but we will see what kind of situations these people do face. Sitting in front of a VA clinic a couple years ago, a young girl came out and headed to the parking lot. She was about 23 or 24 and had an arm left. That's all. Two artificial legs and an artificial arm. How do you suppose she got that way?
Mary
I know war is a bloody business and we all need to acknowledge that and the sacrifices made by you and others in the services, but do we need to sell in essecne tickets to it? Isn't that making a sham out of sacrifice?
Republician Party/Tea Party Point of reference. The Katrina Victims. Our government. Any government who denie its people the right to live is a government who is denied the right to govern and lead. The Republician and Tea Party does not believe in government so they were not moved to do anything for the Katrena people. These are the same Republicians and Tea Partiers who are so eager to lead our country The United States of America to her end and distruction. Be not deceived these have no love in their hearts for America and what she stand for. They are soaked in a sea filled with hate to its core. I know I'm right. Defeated they are. For no weapon formed against her shall prosper. Their weapons which is their mouth for no good is taken away from them and that in their hands.