The Amazing Race   American Idol   The Apprentice   The Bachelor   The Bachelorette   Big Brother   The Biggest Loser
Dancing with the Stars   So You Think You Can Dance   Survivor   Top Model   The Voice   The X Factor       Reality TV World
   
Reality TV World Message Board Forums
PLEASE NOTE: The Reality TV World Message Boards are filled with desperate attention-seekers pretending to be one big happy PG/PG13-rated family. Don't be fooled. Trying to get everyone to agree with you is like herding cats, but intolerance for other viewpoints is NOT welcome and respect for other posters IS required at all times. Jump in and play, and you'll soon find out how easy it is to fit in, but save your drama for your mama. All members are encouraged to read the complete guidelines. As entertainment critic Roger Ebert once said, "If you disagree with something I write, tell me so, argue with me, correct me--but don't tell me to shut up. That's not the American way."
"A final word on editing..."
Email this topic to a friend
Printer-friendly version of this topic
Bookmark this topic (Registered users only)
 
Previous Topic | Next Topic 
Conferences The Apprentice General Discussion Forum (Protected)
Original message

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-16-05, 10:54 AM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
"A final word on editing..."
Did anyone notice that each contestant who had something positive to say about Randal during the finale received a negative edit from Mark Burnett during the telecast?

Randal also asked his colleagues to stand if they supported his becoming the Apprentice. Mark Burnett and his minions did NOT cut up the house lights so that the viewing audience could see that nearly 100% of the contestants (perhaps with the exception of Toral) stood up.

The candidates knew from personal experience that Randal was the best person for the job, but Burnett apparently did not want to highlight this fact. Did anyone else notice this?

--Singer

  Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

  Table of Contents

  Subject     Author     Message Date     ID  
 RE: A final word on editing... sudiwoo 12-16-05 1
   RE: A final word on editing... lrlr1 12-16-05 9
 RE: A final word on editing... Reeflex7 12-16-05 2
   RE: A final word on editing... justcallmemom 12-16-05 3
       RE: A final word on editing... lrlr1 12-16-05 12
   Agreed DooWahDitty 12-16-05 4
       RE: Agreed Wacko Jacko 12-16-05 5
           RE: Agreed singer 12-16-05 7
           RE: Agreed lrlr1 12-16-05 14
               RE: Agreed singer 12-16-05 18
       RE: Agreed lrlr1 12-16-05 13
           RE: Agreed Wacko Jacko 12-16-05 15
               RE: Agreed singer 12-16-05 16
                   RE: Agreed Wacko Jacko 12-16-05 26
                       RE: Agreed singer 12-16-05 29
                           RE: Agreed Wacko Jacko 12-19-05 45
                   RE: Agreed JoshInSGV 12-23-05 59
               RE: Agreed lrlr1 12-18-05 37
   RE: A final word on editing... lrlr1 12-16-05 10
   RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-17-05 31
 RE: A final word on editing... Melody 12-16-05 6
   RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-16-05 8
       RE: A final word on editing... Melody 12-16-05 27
           RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-16-05 28
   RE: A final word on editing... lrlr1 12-16-05 17
 RE: A final word on editing... DrKegel 12-16-05 11
   RE: A final word on editing... shabalaba 12-16-05 19
       RE: A final word on editing... DooWahDitty 12-16-05 20
       RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-16-05 30
   Why Rebecca should have been offere... namedujour 12-18-05 36
       RE: Why Rebecca should have been of... lrlr1 12-18-05 38
 RE: A final word on editing... ND4me 12-16-05 21
   RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-16-05 22
       RE: A final word on editing... shabalaba 12-16-05 23
           RE: A final word on editing... justcallmemom 12-16-05 24
               RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-16-05 25
 RE: A final word on editing... DooWahDitty 12-18-05 32
   Education - Creativity = Puppet Pez 12-18-05 34
       RE: Education - Creativity = Puppet singer 12-18-05 39
   RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-18-05 41
       RE: A final word on editing... DooWahDitty 12-18-05 42
           RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-20-05 57
       RE: A final word on editing... JoshInSGV 12-23-05 60
           RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-30-05 63
               RE: A final word on editing... JoshInSGV 01-05-06 65
                   RE: A final word on editing... singer 01-05-06 67
 RE: A final word on editing... MizJazmine 12-18-05 33
   RE: A final word on editing... Pez 12-18-05 35
       RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-18-05 40
           RE: A final word on editing... Pez 12-19-05 43
               RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-19-05 44
                   RE: A final word on editing... volsfan 12-19-05 46
                       RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-19-05 47
                           RE: A final word on editing... volsfan 12-19-05 48
                               RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-19-05 49
                                   RE: A final word on editing... volsfan 12-19-05 52
                                       RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-19-05 53
                                           RE: A final word on editing... volsfan 12-19-05 54
                                               RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-19-05 56
                               RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-19-05 50
                               RE: A final word on editing... lrlr1 12-19-05 51
                                   RE: A final word on editing... MizJazmine 12-19-05 55
                                       RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-22-05 58
                                           RE: A final word on editing... JoshInSGV 12-23-05 61
                                               RE: A final word on editing... singer 12-30-05 62
                                                   RE: A final word on editing... big brutha 12-31-05 64
                                                   RE: A final word on editing... JoshInSGV 01-05-06 66
                                                       RE: A final word on editing... singer 01-05-06 68

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

Messages in this topic

sudiwoo 6 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "American Cancer Society Spokesperson"

12-16-05, 10:59 AM (EST)
Click to EMail sudiwoo Click to send private message to sudiwoo Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
1. "RE: A final word on editing..."
It's a TV Show!!! Ratings, ratings... Rebecca is the only one who continues (Today show appearance) to display class in spite of the "TV Show"! Yea for Rebecca.. I can't wait to see what happens to her next. As for Randall, he gets to work with boring ole Trump!
  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

12-16-05, 01:23 PM (EST)
Click to EMail lrlr1 Click to send private message to lrlr1 Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
9. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>It's a TV Show!!! Ratings,
>ratings... Rebecca is the only
>one who continues (Today show
>appearance) to display class in
>spite of the "TV Show"!
> Yea for Rebecca.. I
>can't wait to see what
>happens to her next.
>As for Randall, he gets
>to work with boring ole
>Trump!


The only 'class' Rebecca ever had came from standing next to Randal. Hell, stand Atilla the Hun next to Randal and he'll look good!

And yes, I did notice. When I got to my feet from ROFLMAO, my friends and cheered. Vindicated! I've been saying all along NEGATIVE EDITING! The LIVE (thank God for Live) broadcast PROVED it!

Go Randal!!!!!

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Reeflex7 187 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson"

12-16-05, 12:38 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Reeflex7 Click to send private message to Reeflex7 Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
2. "RE: A final word on editing..."
I have no clue what you are talking about.

The show is live. How can you cue the house lights and cut to the candidates who were standing for Randall if you don't know he's going to do it ahead of time? If it's not rehearsed, it's not as easy to just do it off the cuff as you probably think it is.

And, because it's live, how exactly are they supposed to coordinate "giving the person a negative edit" when they don't know for certain who the candidate is going to endorse? Alla supported Randall, and then they played that clip of her browbeating Felicia, but who knew she'd pick Randall so strongly? Marshawn supported Randall, did she get a negative edit? I would also remind you that Toral went to bat for Rebecca and Trump then proceeded to crap all over Toral.

Is it possible that none of these things have anything to do with racism?

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

justcallmemom 13 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Got Milk? Spokesperson"

12-16-05, 12:55 PM (EST)
Click to EMail justcallmemom Click to send private message to justcallmemom Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
3. "RE: A final word on editing..."
A quick note on "live." Live shows are broadcasted with at least a 15 second delay. Some are as long as 30 seconds. This gives the producer ample time to choose the camera to shift on air. Also, consider the possibility that the cast was questioned before the show to determine who leaned in which direction.
As I posted earler, I think that this show was scripted. Randals first task as Trumps employee was to deliver the "aprentici" quote. This gave credence to the advertised Big Surprise (DT would hire 2), and makes Trump look like a thwarted good guy. Rebecca walks off with a fat offer from a sponcer. Everyone wins.
  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

12-16-05, 01:41 PM (EST)
Click to EMail lrlr1 Click to send private message to lrlr1 Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
12. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>Randals first task as Trumps
>employee was to deliver the
>"aprentici" quote. This gave credence
>to the advertised Big Surprise
>(DT would hire 2), and
>makes Trump look like a
>thwarted good guy.


No it doesn't. It made Trump, the would-be great manipulator, look exactly like what he was: Trumped


Rebecca walks
>off with a fat offer
>from a sponcer. Everyone wins.
>

Rebecca works for Crain's Business Review, a small Midwestern trade newspaper. Since she earns no more than $30,000/year (if that much), I'm glad Yahoo hired her.

P.S. What did they say Randal was worth again?

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

DooWahDitty 1615 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Peanut Festival Grand Marshall"

12-16-05, 12:55 PM (EST)
Click to EMail DooWahDitty Click to send private message to DooWahDitty Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
4. "Agreed"
"Is it possible that none of these things have anything to do with racism?"


  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Wacko Jacko 2434 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Seventeen Magazine Model"

12-16-05, 12:59 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Wacko%20Jacko Click to send private message to Wacko%20Jacko Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
5. "RE: Agreed"
It is amazing. Randal loses we get shouts of rasicm. And he wins we still get shouts of rasicm. Amazing.
  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-16-05, 01:07 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
7. "RE: Agreed"
>It is amazing. Randal loses
>we get shouts of rasicm.
> And he wins we
>still get shouts of rasicm.
> Amazing.

I am not shouting, nor is anyone else here. My post is about the editing process. Please stay on topic.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

12-16-05, 01:49 PM (EST)
Click to EMail lrlr1 Click to send private message to lrlr1 Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
14. "RE: Agreed"
>It is amazing. Randal loses
>we get shouts of rasicm.
> And he wins we
>still get shouts of rasicm.
> Amazing.


What is amazing is how you and others bring up racism when the original poster did not. Do you know something the rest of us don't?

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-16-05, 01:58 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
18. "RE: Agreed"
Yes, lrlr1, but what do you think about the editing process? Is this show scripted or what? Let's stay on topic, guys.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

12-16-05, 01:45 PM (EST)
Click to EMail lrlr1 Click to send private message to lrlr1 Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
13. "RE: Agreed"
>"Is it possible that none of
>these things have anything to
>do with racism?"
>
>
Again, who said anything about racism?
  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Wacko Jacko 2434 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Seventeen Magazine Model"

12-16-05, 01:50 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Wacko%20Jacko Click to send private message to Wacko%20Jacko Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
15. "RE: Agreed"
LAST EDITED ON 12-16-05 AT 01:54 PM (EST)

Well, I do recall you saying in an earlier post that if Randal did not win you and the entire black population would boycott the show. hmmmmmmmm.

Read below (DrKegal).....all along people have been shouting racism.

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-16-05, 01:55 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
16. "RE: Agreed"
Wacko, please stay on topic.

I'm interested in what you think about the editing process. I have a view, and others have other views. Let's toss ideas around and learn from each other. How about it?

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Wacko Jacko 2434 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Seventeen Magazine Model"

12-16-05, 04:34 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Wacko%20Jacko Click to send private message to Wacko%20Jacko Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
26. "RE: Agreed"
LAST EDITED ON 12-16-05 AT 04:57 PM (EST)


What is there really to add about the editing process. First off this show was live so nothing was edited. THey did not show the people stand up because the camera angle did not get it...it was very dark in the studio. But Trump did indicate that a majority responded for Randal. I am guessing about 70%. I think the three on Rebecca's team did not stand.

The show edits MANY Things. I have heard so from a friend of a friend who was a former contestent. In fact much is manipulated. And I would guess the editing is not done by Trump but by Burnett. I mean the show is very misleading. The boardroom is a set. The apartment is a set. The cab rides are faked and in fact they even faked Randal walking back into the apartment after his task in Trump Tower......it is common knowledge that the apartment is not even in Trump Towers. And you know what? All reality show are edited this way. It is nothing different.

I do not feel the editing was unfair to either Rebecca or Randal. With Marcus it is a different story. I feel they were editing him to look like a buffoon.

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-16-05, 08:10 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
29. "RE: Agreed"
LAST EDITED ON 12-16-05 AT 08:12 PM (EST)

>LAST EDITED ON 12-16-05
>AT 04:57PM (EST)

>
>
>What is there really to add
>about the editing process.
>First off this show was
>live so nothing was edited.
> THey did not show
>the people stand up because
>the camera angle did not
>get it...it was very dark
>in the studio. But
>Trump did indicate that a
>majority responded for Randal.
>I am guessing about 70%.
> I think the three
>on Rebecca's team did not
>stand.
>
>The show edits MANY Things.
>I have heard so from
>a friend of a friend
>who was a former contestent.
> In fact much is
>manipulated. And I would
>guess the editing is not
>done by Trump but by
>Burnett. I mean the
>show is very misleading.
>The boardroom is a set.
> The apartment is a
>set. The cab rides
>are faked and in fact
>they even faked Randal walking
>back into the apartment after
>his task in Trump Tower......it
>is common knowledge that the
>apartment is not even in
>Trump Towers. And you
>know what? All reality show
>are edited this way.
>It is nothing different.
>
>I do not feel the editing
>was unfair to either Rebecca
>or Randal. With Marcus
>it is a different story.
> I feel they were
>editing him to look like
>a buffoon.

I definitely agree with you about Marcus and about your other editing points, except the Rebecca/Randal part. And my disagreement speaks only to the week before the finale, when it appeared that Burnett was giving Randal a loser's edit.

And I also concede that each manipulated image is not solely manipulated on racial grounds.

I just hate the way that Burnett "does his thing." It really sickens me.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Wacko Jacko 2434 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Seventeen Magazine Model"

12-19-05, 09:47 AM (EST)
Click to EMail Wacko%20Jacko Click to send private message to Wacko%20Jacko Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
45. "RE: Agreed"
If anything I think the edit was done that way to make the competition appear closer. If Randal was edited to appear perfect there would've been no suspense.....but editing or not Randal did what he did to give himself the edit. Burnett did not make it up.
  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

JoshInSGV 737 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

12-23-05, 00:43 AM (EST)
Click to EMail JoshInSGV Click to send private message to JoshInSGV Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
59. "RE: Agreed"
We all know that the editing in The Apprentice (as in any other reality show) is biased, I just don't think this is necessarily based on race.
  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

12-18-05, 12:01 PM (EST)
Click to EMail lrlr1 Click to send private message to lrlr1 Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
37. "RE: Agreed"
>LAST EDITED ON 12-16-05
>AT 01:54PM (EST)

>
>Well, I do recall you saying
>in an earlier post that
>if Randal did not win
>you and the entire black
>population would boycott the show.
> hmmmmmmmm.
>
>Read below (DrKegal).....all along people have
>been shouting racism.


While I do know a few black people, I do not presume to speak for them, much less the entire black population. I suggest you go back and re-read that 'earlier post' with a less jaundiced eye. As for "Read below..." the operative word is 'below'. Up to the point of reading your post, reports of racism were provocative rather than actual.

But we are discussing editing here. All the editing of R&R's challenges were calculated to make two VASTLY UNequal candidates appear to be equal. The same with the boardroom questioning of Randal by Trump and commentary from his 2 minions, George and Carolyn. It was this obvious and clumsy attempt to diminish his stature, achievements and performance that made bells go off in Randal's head, prompting him to turn and ask for verfication and validation of his supremacy from his and Rebecca's peers - their former teammates. And he got it, and in spades.

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

12-16-05, 01:33 PM (EST)
Click to EMail lrlr1 Click to send private message to lrlr1 Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
10. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>Is it possible that none of
>these things have anything to
>do with racism?


Who said anything about racism?

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-17-05, 11:44 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
31. "RE: A final word on editing..."
"I would also remind you that Toral went to bat for Rebecca and Trump then proceeded to crap all over Toral."

And with good reason.


--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Melody 18 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Got Milk? Spokesperson"

12-16-05, 12:59 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Melody Click to send private message to Melody Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
6. "RE: A final word on editing..."
singer----

I also noticed the decision not to show how many contestants stood up for Randal. Two thoughts came to mind. One was that it was clear from the moment Randal entered the room last night that he was bugged by something (check out his game face --- layed back, nice Randal is missing). Second, when Randal asked his fellow contestants to stand up for him if they thought he should be the "single, only" apprentice, I knew he had been reading the boards and was determined this should not be a dual hire (I think some of the other contestants had also been reading the boards because <in the dark> it didn't look like all of them were surprised by Randals request). Trump should have picked up on this and never, NEVER asked Randal to share the spotlight. Unfortunately, Trump clearly wanted a double hire (hence, no spotlight on those who stood up for Randal as the "single, only" apprentice) and put Randal in an untenable situation.

If Trump/Burnett had asked Randal if he would hire Rebecca to work for him (Randal), or if Trump had asked Randal if he should hire Rebecca because she shows promise to be an excellent employee (focussing on her youth), perhaps everyone could have saved face!

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-16-05, 01:16 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
8. "RE: A final word on editing..."
"If Trump/Burnett had asked Randal if he would hire Rebecca to work for him (Randal), or if Trump had asked Randal if he should hire Rebecca because she shows promise to be an excellent employee (focussing on her youth), perhaps everyone could have saved face!"

That's certainly one solution, Melody. The other is for Burnett to go back to England and negatively edit people there. Yet another is for Trump to play the game by one set of rules.

Trump really did himself no good when he asked a new employee about a hiring decision that should have been his alone. He made himself look doubly silly when he and Burnett tried to sway public opinion with the editing shenanigans that I alluded to in my original post in this thread.

So much for "reality" television and its scripted images...

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Melody 18 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Got Milk? Spokesperson"

12-16-05, 05:17 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Melody Click to send private message to Melody Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
27. "RE: A final word on editing..."
Singer ---

I know, I know ---- Trump/Burnett should have just hired Randal. I can't help it, I am always trying to create a win/win situation to ameliorate everyones desires --- deserved or not.

I suffer from "middle child" syndrome --

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-16-05, 08:07 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
28. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>Singer ---
>
>I know, I know ---- Trump/Burnett
>should have just hired Randal.
> I can't help it,
>I am always trying to
>create a win/win situation to
>ameliorate everyones desires --- deserved
>or not.
>
>I suffer from "middle child" syndrome
>--


You are so funny! I'm a middle kid, too!!!

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

12-16-05, 01:56 PM (EST)
Click to EMail lrlr1 Click to send private message to lrlr1 Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
17. "RE: A final word on editing..."
when Randal asked his fellow contestants to stand up for him if they thought he should be the "single, only" apprentice, I knew he had been reading the boards and was determined this should not be a dual hire (I think some of the other contestants had also been reading the boards because <in the dark> it didn't look like all of them were surprised by Randals request).


That is EXACTLY what I told my friends! After I got up from ROFLMAO!


Trump should have picked up on this and never, NEVER asked Randal to share the spotlight.


Psst! Trump read the boards, too. That's why instead of making R&R joint apprentices, he tried to manipulate Randal into springing his BIG surprise for him. And shock! He got trumped!

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

DrKegel 430 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Daytime Soap Guest Star"

12-16-05, 01:36 PM (EST)
Click to EMail DrKegel Click to send private message to DrKegel Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
11. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>Did anyone notice that each contestant
>who had something positive to
>say about Randal during the
>finale received a negative edit
>from Mark Burnett during the
>telecast?
>
>Randal also asked his colleagues to
>stand if they supported his
>becoming the Apprentice. Mark Burnett
>and his minions did NOT
>cut up the house lights
>so that the viewing audience
>could see that nearly 100%
>of the contestants (perhaps with
>the exception of Toral) stood
>up.
>
>The candidates knew from personal experience
>that Randal was the best
>person for the job, but
>Burnett apparently did not want
>to highlight this fact. Did
>anyone else notice this?
>
>--Singer

Duly noted, sir!

Yes, it's amazing isn't it? And this totally smacks of racism AND thinking below the belt. The Donald has a "thing" for Rebecca. It's been apparent from the beginning.

You take every other year the Apprentice was on and ... IN EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE WHEN A CANDIDATE ALLOWED PERSONAL LIKES AND DISLIKES TO CLOUD WHO WAS BROUGHT INTO THE BOARDROOM, THEY WERE SUMMARILY FIRED ON THE SPOT!!!! And it wasn't even that the audience had to guess as to why they were fired, The Donald made perfectly clear over and over again that PERSONAL FEELINGS HAVE NO PLACE IN THE BOARDROOM!!! But when Becky does this, she has INTEGRITY and LOYALTY!!! Why? Why were these attributes attached to Rebecca when she has no loyalty except apparently to corporations with money and hence raised no money for her charity? And she displayed NO loyalty to Randal when she skewered him in the boardroom with an unfair remark about him losing his luster. She should have taken the responsibility for the mistake since she was PM. It was her job to proofread and make sure everything was correct. And as for Toral, it was strategy. Number one, she got to say how much she admired Donald's old school and number two, who wants to bet that Toral is well-connected and will be helping Becky out after the show? And why ask Toral her opinion? Toral already LIED about the reason for not wearing a cartoon character suit saying it was against her religion! I've been looking for the scripture that says:

THOU SHALT NOT WEAR A CARTOON CHARACTER SUIT ON TV

but can't seem to find one. Could it be that there isn't one? Oh, no! That would make her a .... LIAR!!!! Any wonder she's friends with Becky?

And as far as turning up the lights go, let me see, Mark Burnett and his TV crew didn't have time to turn up the lights? And yet, they have time to switch the camera angle so that there's a shot over Randal's shoulder? Huh? Camera angles don't switch on their own. Someone has to make a decision to do so. If this someone made that decision, they could have made the decision to bring up the lights.

I held my breath when Randal was put on the spot. He's such a gentleman and I couldn't believe he actually helped Rebecca win and did not answer her back in the boardroom. When he came through like a champion I was so very happy.

Also as far as this broken ankle thing, what does he mean other candidates would have gone home? Like who? Heidi's mother was diagnosed with cancer for Chr!!!!'s sake! Actually wasn't Beth on the Real World like Rebecca? She milked her sprained ankle for the entire season to get out of competing in challenges even though she was walking around in heels on occasion. And in the beginning, Rebecca 'SPRAINED' her ankle, and then all of a sudden it was broken. Which was it?

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

shabalaba 369 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Cooking Show Host"

12-16-05, 02:59 PM (EST)
Click to EMail shabalaba Click to send private message to shabalaba Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
19. "RE: A final word on editing..."
I have to throw my two cents in the hat for what it's worth....I too wondered why they didn't turn up the lights when Randall asked his supporters to stand. It seemed odd at the moment. I don't buy in to the whole "racism" thing (JMHO) BUT it did seem very rude and just wrong not to turn the lights on. I could however through the dark shadows see that there were ALOT of standing Apprentice wannabees in his favor. Wonder if anyone has an enhanced video still so we can count them?????
  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

DooWahDitty 1615 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Peanut Festival Grand Marshall"

12-16-05, 03:04 PM (EST)
Click to EMail DooWahDitty Click to send private message to DooWahDitty Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
20. "RE: A final word on editing..."
On another note, I could swear I saw Matt Calamari sitting on the aisle's edge when The Hair came in waving last night.


ok, so I did watch the finale of that season. And so I did watch the first 3 mins. as well as the last 6 of last night.

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-16-05, 08:22 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
30. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>I have to throw my two
>cents in the hat for
>what it's worth....I too wondered
>why they didn't turn up
>the lights when Randall asked
>his supporters to stand.
>It seemed odd at the
>moment. I don't buy
>in to the whole "racism"
>thing (JMHO) BUT it did
>seem very rude and just
>wrong not to turn the
>lights on. I could
>however through the dark shadows
>see that there were ALOT
>of standing Apprentice wannabees in
>his favor. Wonder if
>anyone has an enhanced video
>still so we can count
>them?????

Your position makes sense to me, especially in view of the fact that The Donald had a HUGE slag-fest against Jen M when he wanted to hire Robot Kelly. He used every ace up his sleeve, including planted guests, to say negative things about her.

Jen M is a very talented person. She did not deserve this kind of negative editing and manipulation.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

namedujour 8 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "American Cancer Society Spokesperson"

12-18-05, 06:17 AM (EST)
Click to EMail namedujour Click to send private message to namedujour Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
36. "Why Rebecca should have been offered the job"
What Rebecca was demonstrating was the ability to stand up for an underdog under enormous pressure. That's separate from "personal feelings" that involve subjective, negative observations intended to harm another person and advance your own position. What Rebecca did was something totally different from that, and far more complex. What Rebecca did is extremely rare in the corporate world.

Under ordinary circumstances in the corporate environment, someone like Toral will be treated as though she has cooties, whether or not she has something to contribute (and she very well may have). Her abilities will be totally overlooked because she conveniently gave everyone else an excuse to feel superior toward her. The fact that Donald joined in and took every opportunity to keep Toral in cooties was that much more incentive for the apprentices to dismiss her. In other words, Toral's behavior tagged her as a lower chicken in the pecking order, and that position was ratified by Donald.

People snuggle up to the ones who are closer to the "Light" (i.e. Donald or anyone in corporate management) and push away people who are further from it. Nobody will stand up to defend the person with cooties. This is despicable from a spiritual standpoint, or the standpoint of personal integrity, but it's practical if your objective is to get ahead. It's a strategy that works well for the self-serving. Toral was that person - an easy target the apprentices could attack and dismiss.

Think about it. How much of corporate social structure is based on employees favoring the people who are in favor with the boss? Lots. Sometimes it may be deserved. Sometimes not. It doesn't matter. People in the corporate world like the person who reflects well on them socially and professionally, and feel contempt for the person who doesn't, and this is largely determined by management preferences.

Rebecca felt that she saw something in Toral. It didn't matter to her what Donald thought, and what the other apprentices thought. She had the integrity to stand by her personal conviction that Toral wasn't a total loss, even though Toral was wearing a big Cootie sign on her back. That took guts, and it took bravery. It took a good, strong person to do that - to stand up to Donald and tell him she disagreed (Do you ever see Carolyn or George disagree with Donald? No way.)

What Rebecca did was pull Toral back into the mix and reiterate: "I believe in you." Toral, in response, had a fervent loyalty toward Rebecca that nobody will ever be able to shake. Everything Toral did from that point on was not for her own benefit, but for Rebecca's. And she gave it everything she had.

A great manager gets excellent performance out of mediocre employees. A great manager knows how to instill personal loyalty (in Toral's case, "worship") in her team. A great manager recognizes ability where no one else sees it. Because Rebecca showed signs of being a "great manager", I would expect her to have told Donald to hire Randal as well, had the tables been turned. Why? Because Randal would have owed her big time. She then would have had his loyalty - provided he was a large enough soul to recognize what she was doing for him (his actions in the finale suggest, however, that he does not).

Rebecca used another strategy, but hers didn't involve shutting people out. Her's involved gathering people around her, supporting them, and making them grateful and thereby loyal to her.

I prefer Rebecca's strategy to Randal's. Randal instilled loyalty in his teams as well when he was competing, but when he reached the finish line he dropped the ball and made an enemy out of Rebecca instead of a loyal supporter. He had an opportunity, and he missed it. It casts a pall on his judgment, in my opinion.

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

12-18-05, 01:30 PM (EST)
Click to EMail lrlr1 Click to send private message to lrlr1 Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
38. "RE: Why Rebecca should have been offered the job"
LAST EDITED ON 12-18-05 AT 02:00 PM (EST)

First of all, you're double-posting. You started a thread this morning with the exact same text. That is a no-no. But since I disagreed, but did not respond to your new thread, I'll do so with your post.

>What Rebecca was demonstrating was the
>ability to stand up for
>an underdog under enormous pressure.
>That's separate from "personal feelings"
>that involve subjective, negative observations
>intended to harm another person
>and advance your own position.


'Personal feelings' can be negative or positive. They are just that - personal. BTW, Rebecca is not the first person on the Apprentice to stand up for the 'underdog' (even though Toral was NEVER an 'underdog'. An incompetent, yes, but no an underdog). The only true example of courage under fire on The Appretice would be Jenn M from Season 2. She stood up for Stacy J in the boardroom when the entirety of the Witches Coven sought to, and DID, paint Stacy J as worthless in DT's eyes. And what made her truly courageous, a woman of her convictions (NOT friendship!), was that she and Stacy J were NEVER friends. Jenn M stood up for courage,
integrity and on the strength of her convictions.
Rebecca stood up for her friend.


>What Rebecca did was something
>totally different from that, and
>far more complex. What Rebecca
>did is extremely rare in
>the corporate world.
>
>Under ordinary circumstances in the corporate
>environment, someone like Toral will
>be treated as though she
>has cooties, whether or not
>she has something to contribute
>(and she very well may
>have).


Possible. If she ever learns how to use a TV remote control, at any rate.


Her abilities will be
>totally overlooked because she conveniently
>gave everyone else an excuse
>to feel superior toward her.


Were we looking at the same show? Toral despised the other women, looked down on them ("they could be mine and Rebecca's secretaries"), ridiculed them for not having as 'good' an education as she and Rebecca had, said in the boardroom they were all "jealous" of her because she was beautiful. Toral was not underdog, and if anyone demonstrated a feeling of superiority toward others, it was Toral. Plus, she told lies.


>The fact that Donald joined
>in and took every opportunity
>to keep Toral in cooties
>was that much more incentive
>for the apprentices to dismiss
>her. In other words, Toral's
>behavior tagged her as a
>lower chicken in the pecking
>order, and that position was
>ratified by Donald.


Thank you for PROVING my point about Jenn M and Stacy J. Nothing you wrote is true about Toral. Everything word you wrote fits Stacy J to a T!!

>People snuggle up to the ones
>who are closer to the
>"Light" (i.e. Donald or anyone
>in corporate management) and push
>away people who are further
>from it. Nobody will stand
>up to defend the person
>with cooties. This is despicable
>from a spiritual standpoint, or
>the standpoint of personal integrity,
>but it's practical if your
>objective is to get ahead.
>It's a strategy that works
>well for the self-serving. Toral
>was that person - an
>easy target the apprentices could
>attack and dismiss.


Again, thank you for proving MY contentions. Personal integrity fits Jenn M to a T. What you speak of with Rebecca was FRIENDSHIP. And for everything you say about Toral, just type in Stacy J's name - the TRUE underdog.

>What Rebecca did was pull Toral
>back into the mix and
>reiterate: "I believe in you."
>Toral, in response, had a
>fervent loyalty toward Rebecca that
>nobody will ever be able
>to shake. Everything Toral did
>from that point on was
>not for her own benefit,
>but for Rebecca's. And she
>gave it everything she had.
>
>
Excuse me? Because Rebecca stood up for their friendship, Toral became her dog? That Toral said in effect that she was no longer working to be chosen The Apprentice, that she was there SOLELY to advance Rebecca's cause? Cooties? That's insanity!

>A great manager gets excellent performance
>out of mediocre employees.


Then Yahoo should expect good things of their newest, mediocre employee.


A
>great manager knows how to
>instill personal loyalty (in Toral's
>case, "worship") in her team.


Toral worships Rebecca? Wow. Talk about insanity!

>A great manager recognizes ability
>where no one else sees
>it. Because Rebecca showed signs
>of being a "great manager",


I didn't see any. I saw a mediocre talent pretending with DT's blessing and biased editing, to be a star.

>I would expect her to
>have told Donald to hire
>Randal as well, had the
>tables been turned. Why? Because
>Randal would have owed her
>big time. She then would
>have had his loyalty -
>provided he was a large
>enough soul to recognize what
>she was doing for him
>(his actions in the finale
>suggest, however, that he does
>not).
>

I'm beginning to see a trend here. If someone is what most people would consider a "friend" to you, you automatically become their "dog" for life.

>Rebecca used another strategy, but hers
>didn't involve shutting people out.
>Her's involved gathering people around
>her, supporting them, and making
>them grateful and thereby loyal
>to her.
>

Name one other than Toral - whom you consider to be Rebecca's 'dog'. When those contestants stood at Randal's request, it told me that some of her teammates did not even LIKE Rebecca and that most did not respect her (Psst! That's the relationship most people have with their friends - like and respect, rather than blind, dumb doggy loyalty).

>I prefer Rebecca's strategy to Randal's.
>Randal instilled loyalty in his
>teams as well when he
>was competing, but when he
>reached the finish line he
>dropped the ball and made
>an enemy out of Rebecca
>instead of a loyal supporter.


Umm. So beating the competition is not enough. We have to MAKE people who try to claw their way to the top over our dead, defeated bodies, our "loyal supporters", as well. Interesting concept.


>He had an opportunity, and
>he missed it. It casts
>a pall on his judgment,
>in my opinion.


By your stated and implied definitions, I'm sure it did.

But, back to the editing process...

P.S. Edited to say that ND4me's post follows this one, but because it is dated 12/16/05, and mine and Namedujour's posts are dated 12/18/05, it refers back to a post previous to ours.

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

ND4me 12 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Got Milk? Spokesperson"

12-16-05, 03:07 PM (EST)
Click to EMail ND4me Click to send private message to ND4me Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
21. "RE: A final word on editing..."
YEA!!!! And I think there were actually FOUR shooter in Dealey Plaza that November day in 1963!!!
  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-16-05, 03:15 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
22. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>YEA!!!! And I think there
>were actually FOUR shooter in
>Dealey Plaza that November day
>in 1963!!!


What, in heaven's name, are you talking about?

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

shabalaba 369 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Cooking Show Host"

12-16-05, 03:52 PM (EST)
Click to EMail shabalaba Click to send private message to shabalaba Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
23. "RE: A final word on editing..."

>
>
>What, in heaven's name, are you
>talking about?
>

Thanks Singer, I was wondering the exact same thing!


  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

justcallmemom 13 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Got Milk? Spokesperson"

12-16-05, 04:03 PM (EST)
Click to EMail justcallmemom Click to send private message to justcallmemom Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
24. "RE: A final word on editing..."
I think he is trying to say, in inscrutable fashion, that we are imagining a conspiracy where there is no evidence, like in the JFK assination of 1963. The way I see it, we are talking about rating-driven TV, and plans to boost ratings are part of business as usual, not conspiracies.
  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-16-05, 04:22 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
25. "RE: A final word on editing..."
Justcallmemom, thanks so much for your input. I honestly didn't know WHAT that post meant.

I appreciate your insights, and I have read all of your posts on these boards. They are interesting, and they make loads of sense to me (especially the ratings angle)!

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

DooWahDitty 1615 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Peanut Festival Grand Marshall"

12-18-05, 00:31 AM (EST)
Click to EMail DooWahDitty Click to send private message to DooWahDitty Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
32. "RE: A final word on editing..."
Hey Singer, finally have time to completely read through this thread and I think what you really meant was "direction" rather than "editing". Not nitpicking, just clarifying.

It's so easy to call the R card when really it's a Ratings issue. Really pathetic because Burnie doesn't give a damn about fallout when he pulls his ratings-grabbing stunts. Randal surely thinks the producers are pathetic. Now he's got to work with them. But hel, he knows how. Who knows, maybe he's more ethical than they are. We don't really have any way of knowing.


Sigpic by Seana

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Pez 56 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square"

12-18-05, 02:35 AM (EST)
Click to EMail Pez Click to send private message to Pez Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
34. "Education - Creativity = Puppet"
LAST EDITED ON 12-18-05 AT 02:38 AM (EST)


No amount of editing could make Randal look good. His true colors were revealed for all to see. He is well educated but does not appear to have an ounce of creativity is his body. And folks, to be a successful entrepreneur, inventor, engineer, scientist (the list goes on and on) you need a bit of creative thinking. I doubt that you will ever see anything innovative come from Randal.

During the season Randal made one stupid decision after another. He won his tasks... big woopdedoo! Most of the wins and losses have little to do with who is leading the tasks. I was not sure if I was watching the Apprentice this year or "the Biggest Losers". Seriously, most of the cast was pathetic. It's funny to hear some of the cast say that they think that they are part of the cream of the crop because they got on the show. How delusional.

Back to Randal, he talks about having a multi-million dollar company but what does that really mean? Does it mean that he does millions per year in sales? In profit? Net? Gross? Value of his company? A million dollar company with three partners does not really mean all that much. The first Apprentice, "Pantload" Bill Ransik, claimed to have a multi-million dollar business but the most he ever made in his life was the year he worked for Trump and was paid $250k for his first year. I have owned businesses that have done is excess of two million dollars in sales in a single year but despite this, it still lost money. You could say that I owned a multi-million dollar business but if you know that it is losing money it's not as impressive.

I have no doubt that if Rebecca was the winner, and if she was asked by Trump if she thought that he should hire Randal, that she would have said without hesitation, absolutely! Rebecca has class, Randal does not! He lost all of his integrity and the respect of his fans in a fraction of a second. It was just another example of bad decision making by Randal, one of many that I am sure he will make in his short future as Trumps latest hand puppet!

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-18-05, 11:05 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
39. "RE: Education - Creativity = Puppet"
>LAST EDITED ON 12-18-05
>AT 02:38AM (EST)

>
>
>No amount of editing could make
>Randal look good. His true
>colors were revealed for all
>to see. He is well
>educated but does not appear
>to have an ounce of
>creativity is his body. And
>folks, to be a successful
>entrepreneur, inventor, engineer, scientist (the
>list goes on and on)
>you need a bit of
>creative thinking. I doubt that
>you will ever see anything
>innovative come from Randal.
>
>During the season Randal made one
>stupid decision after another. He
>won his tasks... big woopdedoo!
>Most of the wins and
>losses have little to do
>with who is leading the
>tasks. I was not sure
>if I was watching the
>Apprentice this year or "the
>Biggest Losers". Seriously, most of
>the cast was pathetic. It's
>funny to hear some of
>the cast say that they
>think that they are part
>of the cream of the
>crop because they got on
>the show. How delusional.
>
>Back to Randal, he talks about
>having a multi-million dollar company
>but what does that really
>mean? Does it mean that
>he does millions per year
>in sales? In profit? Net?
>Gross? Value of his company?
>A million dollar company with
>three partners does not really
>mean all that much. The
>first Apprentice, "Pantload" Bill Ransik,
>claimed to have a multi-million
>dollar business but the most
>he ever made in his
>life was the year he
>worked for Trump and was
>paid $250k for his first
>year. I have owned businesses
>that have done is excess
>of two million dollars in
>sales in a single year
>but despite this, it still
>lost money. You could say
>that I owned a multi-million
>dollar business but if you
>know that it is losing
>money it's not as impressive.
>
>
>I have no doubt that if
>Rebecca was the winner, and
>if she was asked by
>Trump if she thought that
>he should hire Randal, that
>she would have said without
>hesitation, absolutely! Rebecca has
>class, Randal does not! He
>lost all of his integrity
>and the respect of his
>fans in a fraction of
>a second. It was just
>another example of bad decision
>making by Randal, one of
>many that I am sure
>he will make in his
>short future as Trumps latest
>hand puppet!

What does any of this have to do with my original question about editing? Topic, please.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-18-05, 11:16 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
41. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>Hey Singer, finally have time to
>completely read through this thread
>and I think what you
>really meant was "direction" rather
>than "editing". Not nitpicking,
>just clarifying.
>
>It's so easy to call the
>R card when really it's
>a Ratings issue. Really
>pathetic because Burnie doesn't give
>a damn about fallout when
>he pulls his ratings-grabbing stunts.
> Randal surely thinks the
>producers are pathetic. Now
>he's got to work with
>them. But hel, he
>knows how. Who knows,
>maybe he's more ethical than
>they are. We don't
>really have any way of
>knowing.
>
>
>Sigpic by Seana>size]

I definitely mean editing, because they cut and splice segments together out of sequence and do other things to create a story arc.

They also direct the players to do things (like telling Omarosa to put that silly hat on during the final task when she was on Kwame's team. The goal was to play up her negatives from earlier in the season.)

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

DooWahDitty 1615 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Peanut Festival Grand Marshall"

12-18-05, 11:49 PM (EST)
Click to EMail DooWahDitty Click to send private message to DooWahDitty Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
42. "RE: A final word on editing..."
OK. I thought you were talking about the finale, which was mostly live. That would be direction. Didn't realize you were talking about editing in all the previous episodes.


Sigpic by Seana

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-20-05, 09:07 AM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
57. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>OK. I thought you were talking
>about the finale, which was
>mostly live. That would
>be direction. Didn't realize
>you were talking about editing
>in all the previous episodes.
>
>
>
>Sigpic by Seana>size]


Hey, DooWah. I'm really referring to all episodes, since as Justcallmemom rightly noted, the "live" show is shown to us after about a 30 second time delay.

But I do understand your distinction about direction. I guess the bottom line for me is that Burnett is manipulating audience responses to programme outcomes. He does this by manipulating images during the weeks of challenges or directing what we saw during the studio audience taping.

I'm trying to figure out if other people see this, too. Apparently, they do.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

JoshInSGV 737 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

12-23-05, 01:02 AM (EST)
Click to EMail JoshInSGV Click to send private message to JoshInSGV Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
60. "RE: A final word on editing..."

>They also direct the players to
>do things (like telling Omarosa
>to put that silly hat
>on during the final task
>when she was on Kwame's
>team. The goal was
>to play up her negatives
>from earlier in the season.)
>
>
>--Singer


singer,
Could you clarify this a little bit? Are you implying that Omarossa's unethical actions in the last task were scripted by the producers? If so, how did you come by this information? Who is your source?

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-30-05, 12:45 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
63. "RE: A final word on editing..."
I'm stating directly that it looks like they directed her to dance around in that basement with the hat on. Why on earth would anybody do something stupid like that, unless they were directed to? And I am not negating the criticisms that people have made about her performance and behaviour on the show.

I wasn't there, so I don't know for sure, but as I observe the editing patterns on the show, it still doesn't make sense to me that an overachiever like Marshawn would tank a presentation and then get summarily fired for it unless she was directed to do so--especially given her track record as a good presenter. It doesn't make sense to me that Randal would GIVE Rebecca the chance to be PM, when she hadn't won anything, especially when they were in competition with each other. If Alla was really Felicia's friend, why would she push her to the point of tears in the boardroom and make all of those snide comments about her in the personal interviews? It simply doesn't add up for me. That's what I'm getting at.

And while the editing/directing theories may trouble some people, it doesn't trouble me to to try and figure out why the episodes pan out the way that they do. It also doesn't trouble me to speculate that "reality" television is scripted. It reminds me more of a 1950s-era rigged game show than "Candid Camera."

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

JoshInSGV 737 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

01-05-06, 06:53 PM (EST)
Click to EMail JoshInSGV Click to send private message to JoshInSGV Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
65. "RE: A final word on editing..."
Singer,
It makes perfect sense to me that producers may try to manipulate or even direct certain cast members to do certain things or behave in a certain way just for the sake of stirring the pot. But in my opinion, the devious editing or the influence of the producers on the cast members' actions doesn't redeem the contestants' behavior. Ultimatelly, each cast member is responsible for their own actions. They are the ones who choose to be directed to do certain things or to play it up for the camera for the sake of drama, which is what I believe Omarossa did during the first season of The Apprentice. Omarossa wanted to play the villain (whether she was directed to do so by the producers is yet to be determined) and she accomplished it. We can all come up with creative conspiracy theories about how the producers are trying to screw with our heads, but the DAW's are equally responsible because they volunteered to do the show in the first place.
  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

01-05-06, 07:56 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
67. "RE: A final word on editing..."
Point well-taken.

But I think that Marshawn's apparent discomfort with the arrangement may have had to do with some contractual obligation that players had to follow that direction. Somehow, I get the vibe that she did not want to go along with the idea of not giving the presentation, and the scowl on her face had to do with her having no choice but to go along with the producers after she had worked long hours to prepare the presentation.

There is nothing else that makes sense to me about her not giving the presentation. Afterall, giving it would have provided an opportunity for her to look good, even in the face of a team loss, if for no other reason than the fact that she would have appeared to be a very consistent and hard worker.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

MizJazmine 532 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

12-18-05, 02:07 AM (EST)
Click to EMail MizJazmine Click to send private message to MizJazmine Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
33. "RE: A final word on editing..."
Hey singer...Well to be honest I don't think the editing was any more slanted than it had been. It had ALWAYS been biased toward Rebecca IMO. They edited Randel to try and make him look weak because he was nice, dazed, confused, and even incompetent. Which could not have been further from the truth! I knew there was nothing weak or incompetant about Randal, nothing what so ever. In the meantime they were trying to make Rebecca look just the opposite. While she did have physical endurance, IMO that was just about all she had and Trump kept harping on that because that was about all she had going for her. Trump's remark about Rebecca not going home while he thinks others would have was just plain stupid IMO. They were trying their best to play up Rebecca, but see Randal showed up like I knew he would (my man!) and so did Alla...HAHAHAHAHA. After Alla they had to hurry up and take a commericial break! After that Trump didn't come back and ask any of the former contestants NOTHING!...LOL...NADA. Yep it was rigged, slanted, whatever you want to call it, but not well enough!

PS. Left you something in the "Trumped" thread

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Pez 56 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square"

12-18-05, 02:45 AM (EST)
Click to EMail Pez Click to send private message to Pez Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
35. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>I knew there was nothing weak or incompetant about
> Randal, nothing what so ever.

How do you know this, were you on the show? Are you related to Randal? A friend of Randal's?

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-18-05, 11:06 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
40. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>>I knew there was nothing weak or incompetant about
>> Randal, nothing what so ever.
>
>How do you know this, were
>you on the show? Are
>you related to Randal? A
>friend of Randal's?

Topic, please.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Pez 56 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square"

12-19-05, 02:44 AM (EST)
Click to EMail Pez Click to send private message to Pez Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
43. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>>>I knew there was nothing weak or incompetant about
>>> Randal, nothing what so ever.
>>
>>How do you know this, were
>>you on the show? Are
>>you related to Randal? A
>>friend of Randal's?
>
>Topic, please.
>
>--Singer


How do you know this, were you on the show or involved with the editing?

Are you related to Randal, a friend of Randal's, were you in any of the clips that they edited for the finale?

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-19-05, 07:16 AM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
44. "RE: A final word on editing..."
One more time:

Topic, please.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

volsfan 19846 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"

12-19-05, 10:00 AM (EST)
Click to EMail volsfan Click to send private message to volsfan Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
46. "RE: A final word on editing..."
In all fairness...it is a good question. To say "topic please" isn't addressing a question that the person wants answered.
  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-19-05, 01:50 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
47. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>In all fairness...it is a good
>question. To say "topic please"
>isn't addressing a question that
>the person wants answered.

I was trying to be polite.

It is a lousy question, because it does not have anything to do with this thread.

I have no connection whatsoever to the Apprentice or anybody on it. I do have a strong connection to and belief in a system of rules. I also believe that rules that are unequally applied are inherently unfair and unjustifiable.

The outcry against the winner of the Apprentice stems from a deep-seated desire to ignore rules when it serves the interests of those who want to disempower people. I am personally committed to speaking out against processes of this type.

If enough people had done the same in 2000, our country would not be in the rotten shape that it is in now--specifically with reference to following constitutions and rules of law.

They differentiate us from being mere animals in the state of nature.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

volsfan 19846 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"

12-19-05, 02:25 PM (EST)
Click to EMail volsfan Click to send private message to volsfan Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
48. "RE: A final word on editing..."
This?

I knew there was nothing weak or incompetant about Randal, nothing what so ever.

Has EVERYTHING to do with the topic of this thread and nothing to do with what you supposedly just addressed. The point is that you say you knew there was nothing weak about Randal...the question remains...how do you know?

Since you say you have no connection to The Apprentice or anyone on the show then it is a fair statement that you are basing this on the editing. Strange...isn't it?

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-19-05, 02:36 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
49. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>This?
>
>I knew there was nothing weak
>or incompetant about Randal, nothing
>what so ever.

>
>Has EVERYTHING to do with the
>topic of this thread and
>nothing to do with what
>you supposedly just addressed. The
>point is that you say
>you knew there was nothing
>weak about Randal...the question remains...how
>do you know?
>
>Since you say you have no
>connection to The Apprentice or
>anyone on the show then
>it is a fair statement
>that you are basing this
>on the editing. Strange...isn't it?
>

Semantic sleights-of-hand will not work here.

It is clear that my thread addresses the manner in which the episodes and challenges are edited on video tape. Most participants in this thread are aware of this, and they have addressed their thoughts accordingly.

If you want to address the interviews and books where The Donald has made racist comments about Jews and blacks, there are appropriate threads for those discussions. This is not one.

Topic, please. I, for one, will not go off topic here. I am, however, willing to address other questions in appropriate threads.

And BTW, the focus here is Trump and/or Burnett, not individual posters. You can private message forum participants if you want a personal discussion.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

volsfan 19846 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"

12-19-05, 03:27 PM (EST)
Click to EMail volsfan Click to send private message to volsfan Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
52. "RE: A final word on editing..."
If you want to address the interviews and books where The Donald has made racist comments about Jews and blacks, there are appropriate threads for those discussions. This is not one.

I have been part of this community long enough to understand the guidelines of the forum. None of the guidelines make the starter of a thread the police to tell others what to discuss.

A statement was made by someone that (I for one think) should be answered. That statement doesn't fall under any of the topics of any other thread. Just because it doesn't fall under the heading that you created doesn't mean it CAN'T be addressed.

I am not going to start another thread because it doesn't warrant one.

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-19-05, 03:55 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
53. "RE: A final word on editing..."
LAST EDITED ON 12-20-05 AT 08:36 AM (EST)

"None of the guidelines make the starter of a thread the police to tell others what to discuss."

Nor do the guidelines force forum participants to go off topic if they choose not to, nor do they enjoin forum participants from asking participants politely to stay on topic if they are trying to learn about the topic at hand.

"A statement was made by someone that (I for one think) should be answered."

And I retain the right not to address it.

"That statement doesn't fall under any of the topics of any other thread."

Fair enough. People are free to start one.

"Just because it doesn't fall under the heading that you created doesn't mean it CAN'T be addressed."
I have never asserted this. I chose not to address it, and asked for clarity on the topic at hand.

"I am not going to start another thread because it doesn't warrant one."
You're free not to start one based on your own value judgement. I am free NOT to have an off-topic conversation if I choose not to.

--Singer

Edited to correct spelling.

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

volsfan 19846 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"

12-19-05, 04:11 PM (EST)
Click to EMail volsfan Click to send private message to volsfan Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
54. "RE: A final word on editing..."
LAST EDITED ON 12-19-05 AT 04:14 PM (EST)

nor do they enjoing forum participants from asking participants politely to stay on topic if they are trying to learn about the topic at hand.

This should be done by a moderator and not another poster.

Fair enough. People are free to start one.

The moderators try to keep a clean house around here and starting another thread to discuss a statement mentioned in an existing thread would not be the right thing to do.

ETA: This is my last response to this thread as it really doesn't matter. Welcome to the boards!

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-19-05, 07:00 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
56. "RE: A final word on editing..."
I've been here for a few years. I just write sporadically.

Thanks for the input.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-19-05, 02:44 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
50. "RE: A final word on editing..."
Their "personal experience" prompted them always to choose Randal for their teams when they got the chance, and to get rid of Rebecca when given the chance. They must have thought he was an excellent player.

This same pattern occurred with Amy Henry in Season 1.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

12-19-05, 03:07 PM (EST)
Click to EMail lrlr1 Click to send private message to lrlr1 Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
51. "RE: A final word on editing..."
>This?
>
>I knew there was nothing weak
>or incompetant about Randal, nothing
>what so ever.

>
>Has EVERYTHING to do with the
>topic of this thread and
>nothing to do with what
>you supposedly just addressed. The
>point is that you say
>you knew there was nothing
>weak about Randal...the question remains...how
>do you know?
>
>Since you say you have no
>connection to The Apprentice or
>anyone on the show then
>it is a fair statement
>that you are basing this
>on the editing. Strange...isn't it?
>


I think she is basing her statement on Randal's education, experience, personality and the fact that he won every one of his 4 PM challenges, of which the first 3 no one disputes. Some things are debatable, some things are indisputable.

While I witnessed negative editing, positive editing and 'creative' editing, I do not think anyone feels that ALL the editing was biased toward one candidate or against another. And in my viewing based on these 3 types of editing, I came to the same conclusion as Singer: I knew there was nothing weak or incompetent about Randal, nothing what so ever.

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

MizJazmine 532 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

12-19-05, 04:36 PM (EST)
Click to EMail MizJazmine Click to send private message to MizJazmine Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
55. "RE: A final word on editing..."
My, my, my...all this fuss over one lil 'ol statement...smh....

Why thank you Irir1 that is EXACTLY what I based my statement on!
I guess I didn't get back to the thread soon enough to respond...oh well. By the mere virtue of Randal's academic accomplishments, I knew that man was not weak, but it's also practical application. Randal's winning record in the contexr of the game speaks for itself. Whatever errors or oversights he made during the game, he owned them. Also all I had to really go on concerning Randal's personality was how his teammates responded to him. He was the ONLY person that people always wanted on their team. If Randal were incompetent I know I could have counted on ALLA to say so. If not during the competition, then surely during the finale. I do think Alla is one who is consistant in her nature, and I do think she would have ripped Randal a new one as well...I do. Also Josh was quite the commentator during the competition, and I think he would have said something as well. What I said was in the context of having watched the game and having the same information as most of the viewing audience. I knew that there was nothing weak or incompetent about Randal what so ever, and I stand by it.

Now back to the topic at hand....

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-22-05, 10:37 AM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
58. "RE: A final word on editing..."
MizJaz, I've had some time to think further about the editing and story arc creation idea. I tried to start another thread on this to consider additional options, but it got locked. So I'll try to advance a few other theories here.

1. If we begin with the premise that the entire show is scripted (and I believe that at least parts of it are), the crazy developments of the show begin to make sense.

2. The Donald may have wanted to avoid a lawsuit, which is what another poster suggested to me, so he and Burnett could have instructed Marshawn not to give her presentation so that they could get rid of her.

3. They could have created a faulty reason for getting rid of Alla, who was the best player for most of the season besides Randal.

4. They could have directed Randal to allow Rebecca to be PM, since she had no wins. Given her lousy track record, it makes no sense that Randal would take that risk otherwise. Had she gone into the finals with no wins, no one would have watched, because there could never be a claim that she deserved to win.

I still believe that The Donald has social problems with entire groups of people in this country. But given the millions of dollars he could have lost had he not pandered to Rebecca, it could be that his erratic behaviour in the finale had more to do with a benefit/cost analysis of what he would lose if he did NOT hire Rebecca, than with his own personal social imbalances.

What do you think?

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

JoshInSGV 737 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

12-23-05, 01:13 AM (EST)
Click to EMail JoshInSGV Click to send private message to JoshInSGV Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
61. "RE: A final word on editing..."
Singer,
You do realize that all of your theories are mere speculation? While there is a small chance that some of these things may have happened, Donald's decision-making (although erratic in some people's opinion) and Burnett's editing may have only be driven by the bottom-line: RATINGS! At the end of the day, none of it matters anymore, Randall won. Why are the editing conspiracy theories still thriving if the man won?
  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

12-30-05, 12:06 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
62. "RE: A final word on editing..."
Of course I realise that my theories are mere speculation; theories are in their very nature speculative.

The editing and directing theory matters, regardless of whether it is ratings-driven, precisely because The Donald and Burnett stereotype when they are editing or directing. The theory matters because television is such a powerful medium, that some people actually believe what they see on the screen. And if you pay attention to some of the racist posts that have appeared on these and other boards, it is not helpful to our country's efforts to correct our social ills if the powerful medium of television is used to fan the fires of racism and sexism, rather than to put those fires out. If The Donald and Burnett want ratings, then they should get them without making things worse for people who are discriminated against in this country.

There is an issue larger than mere entertainment at stake here, especially for those who are on the receiving end of bias.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

big brutha 47 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge"

12-31-05, 10:23 AM (EST)
Click to EMail big%20brutha Click to send private message to big%20brutha Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
64. "RE: A final word on editing..."
Singer
way to try to keep people on topic. For all those who think editing isn't huge in tv look at something which we feel is most real, sports in all the images that you see flooding your senses their are people that are constantly looking for the right shot at the right time to move you in one way or the other.
Wake UP.
As for PEZ a man once said you give me a good accountant with a sharp pencil and a 20 million dollar profit can be made to look like a 200K loss.

I think randall was the proper pick not for any other reason then being the best. I liked the Reporter but at the same time the two of them are worlds apart.

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

JoshInSGV 737 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"

01-05-06, 07:08 PM (EST)
Click to EMail JoshInSGV Click to send private message to JoshInSGV Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
66. "RE: A final word on editing..."
I understand that theories are speculative in nature. But, just like you have concerns about the way that stereotypes may shape people's perceptions when they watch the show, I feel like a similar phenomenon also happens on these boards. People take these speculations like truth, even though there is nothing substantial to back it up.
  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser"

01-05-06, 08:01 PM (EST)
Click to EMail singer Click to send private message to singer Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
68. "RE: A final word on editing..."
LAST EDITED ON 01-05-06 AT 08:06 PM (EST)

>I understand that theories are speculative
>in nature. But, just like
>you have concerns about the
>way that stereotypes may shape
>people's perceptions when they watch
>the show, I feel like
>a similar phenomenon also happens
>on these boards. People take
>these speculations like truth, even
>though there is nothing substantial
>to back it up.


The big difference between speculating on these boards and stereotypical speculating that occurs in the workplace is that the former has no disparate impact on hiring patterns for women and people of colour in this country. The latter does.

Television and its manipulative editing has no business feeding those stereotypes.

--Singer

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top


Lock | Archive | Remove

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
about this site   •   advertise on this site  •   contact us  •   privacy policy   •