Kid Nation... (1 Viewer)

[Brian^K]

Since the reports can be taken either way (good or bad) it isn't clear what is what at this point. Until we watch the program, until the children can tell us in their own words or through their own actions how "horrible" the experience was, or wasn't, we all know virtually nothing. That's why I object to jumping to conclusions.

Remember, these aren't our children -- just like we cannot tell parents of child beauty pageants that their children shouldn't participate in child beauty pageants, we shouldn't tell these parents what is the right or wrong experiences for their children, as long as those experiences are legal. We cannot legitimately impose our own personal beliefs on others in a pluralistic society like this one.

 

[KevinGress]

There is one right way, in this case. Choose not to watch. If ratings are dismal, that'll go a long way to dissauding others from doing it.

But, by and large, I agree with Brian^K. I don't see this as any worse than any other "reality" *cough* game *cough* show. And I agree that if a child is harmed, either physically or mentally, that it's the fault of the parents for allowing the child to participate.

It actually sounds a lot like camp, with less direct adult interaction. Wasn't the length of production some 30-40 days? I've heard of parents sending their kids to camps longer than that......

I can somewhat understand the outrage some have towards this concept. I just wish they'd direct that outrage towards "reality" *cough* game *cough* shows in principle.

 

[AnthonyC]

The main problem with this show, and the real reason I wonder why CBS ever decided to do it isn't whatever rules were bent or the inevitable controversy, but I can't imagine anyone over 12 or 13 who would actually be interested in this show. I know I'm not. I'm sure that would drag some parents into watching it too, but I just think it's really a shame that they put The Amazing Race on hold for this.

Sure, Survivor, TAR, and BB are aging but they're consistent concepts with devoted fanbases. Admittedly, Kid Nation is at least not a retread of a past reality show like Pirate Master is, but they've got three pretty reliable performers in the reality show department--why are they looking for a replacement? Sitcoms are the real area that they need to work on (and come on, go out and promote the hell out of How I Met Your Mother--the best laugh track sitcom currently on air--already!).

 

[Chris]

I think the bigger problem I have with this is that it is truly untested ground. Past records show that child celebrities have their own psychological problems dealing with the things that seperate them from their peers, and they have issues that other children of a similar age group do not have.

And these are kids who are seen onscreen only in the best light, portrayed as fictitious characters.

Here, we have kids who will be themselves. And that's fine. But their actions will be caught on film forever.

Have you ever been to a family reunion and watched old video of yourself or others as kids and had to shield your eyes? Oh, that time little billy was at a reunion in 1978 and got caught picking his nose on film (ha-ha!), or the time 13 year old girl had a foolish crush on the boy she wanted and it ended badly.

Seen in a limited audience, it's hard enough. Broadcast before the world, the kids now have a constant reminder of every foible that others can use to harrass them with.

There is a big difference between this and camp. Hell, I think back of things I did as a 13 year old (and yes, I was one of those Student Government/Mock UN types) and I shudder if they were ever caught on film. Hell, the one camp I went to at 12 I -did- get homesick and cried about it. I remember a camp at 14 or 15 where, although I enjoyed it, bad food led to one of the most emberrassing moments I've ever been part of that even twenty years later I have NO desire to remember.

These kids get all of those moments put on film in front of the nation. Do they vote each other off? No, guess not.. but they do vote for "rewards" and set policies that basically devolve to punishments. I'm not sure how good that is.

I'm sure the parents thought this was a good idea. A good chance to get their kid on TV and to get some attention for themselves. Their shot of fame living through kids. Then again, I have umpired little league baseball games where parents sit and scream at their kids incessantly, so parents going along with it doesn't mean it's best.

My basic rules of this are simple: I won't watch. But I do love that CBS is having to spin this as some people think about this and are repelled.

 

[Brian^K]

I wasn't, at least not initially. My wife ordered me to put in a Season Pass for it. My wife is a member of AARP. (nuf sed)

I think you should be a bit careful about what kind of assumptions you make about the kind of people who are intrigued by the concept of this show. You can have your concerns about it, surely, but don't project that into some kind of universal antipathy.

 

[Brian^K]

It is absolutely essential for parents -- all adults -- to respect the legal decisions other parents make for their children.

 

[Chris]

On a personal level, and as a parent, I agree with you here.

However, this decision is not one that is being made by the parents. The parents were offered the ability to make that decision by CBS, not the parents going to CBS with a proposal.

But as a TV show, it's also not the parents decision as it is a community decision as to wether or not to accept their actions.

For example: I have no problem with saying a parent can decide how to raise their child. As an occasional little league umpire though, I also have no problem saying that the rest of the parents don't have to put up with those who yell, scream and curse at their kids, because while they have chosen to do it, and cursing is not illegal, it's a community event and we don't have to tolerate it.

The parents are absolutely within their right to profiteer off their children here, as I'm sure the $5,000 + the fact they didn't have to pay for boarding/food/etc. for their kids doesn't hurt.

But, as a viewing audience, the best we can do is just not watch.

 

[Brian^K]

I don't agree with your equivocation. The parents were given an option to have their children participate or not. We must respect the decision those parents made, without qualification. The fact that it is a television show doesn't have anything to do with the decision the parents made, and the validity thereof. THEIR actions are not subject to our review, since their actions were legal, and it pertained to THEIR children. As I alluded to before, if you condemn the parents for this, you have to condemn all parents of minor beauty pageant contestants, and all parents who let their children participate in the National Spelling Bee, etc.

Each viewer should have the option to decide for themselves (and only themselves) whether this is or isn't something they wish to watch.

 

[Jonny P]

I completely agree.

This looks like a show better suited to Nickelodeon, the Disney Channel, or saturday morning.

I dunno why CBS is looking for a replacement. I think they are concerned that if they don't shake things up a bit, they'll become like NBC in the late 90s (aging shows with no new breakout hits).

As for the child labor thing...

We've all watched enough reality TV to know that involving little kids can be a bit iffy -- regardless of violating any labor laws.

"The Amazing Race: Family Edition" was a failure. The show had been enjoying a ratings surge, then the show lost a lot of viewers when they included kids in the mix and "watered down" the challenges.

 

[Jason Seaver]

The thing is, the kids weren't the problem with The Amazing Race: Family Edition at all; most of the people I knew who watched the show loved them (and commented that they certainly didn't seem to need to water tasks down for 8-year-old Carissa Gaghan). It was how repetitive and familiar a show that thrived on taking the audience to new places became.

This doesn't particularly appeal to me, but it just may get families to tune in, and though families aren't the sexiest demographic, they might be an under-served one.

 

[Brian^K]

Shows about social dynamics tend to attract women, more than families (except if there are scantily-clad women, in which case the shows also attract boys ).

 

[ChristopherG]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/22/us...gewanted=print

I really dislike the rolleyes thingy as I think it is misused and over used, but if ever I were tempted to use it.....

 

[Chris]

If this was classified as a camp, wouldn't it be required to follow the law for operating a care facility in New Mexico?

If they want to contend they were a camp, adult supervision has to match state Health & Human Services ratios and some activities must be prohibited, and some substances must be inspected as off limits.. (go into any daycare in your area and ask them if they let kids cook or use bleach, they'll explain it's a health code violation)

So, did CBS knowingly violate health code laws in operating a poorly run daycare/camp, OR, did they illegally work child actors?

 

[ChristopherG]

Chris,

Either way, CBS's actions in this are repugnant and pretty much fell in line with many of our initial estimations of this "show".

 

[MatthewA]

These revelations sound horrible. The only good that will come out of this is if it has the effect on "reality TV" that Twenty-One and the $64,000 Question had on quiz shows in the 1950s.

 

[Brian^K]

Hopefully, reason will prevail and this matter will simply drop once the show premieres. What happened was nowhere near as nefarious as the media is making it out to be. What happened was within the bounds of the laws applicable at the time, and I think the reactions to it are ridiculous. Beyond that, I think the efforts of governmental authorities to cover their political asses after-the-fact is the most repugnant aspect of this.

 

[Chris]

Brian-

Once again, I have to ask: are you related to someone who works at CBS, or do you work for CBS?

Right now, here's what we know as fact:

* Three kids -were- hospitalized for drinking bleach.
* One child was hospitalized for burns.

Those aren't conjecture, just fact.

The media isn't "making up" stuff, they are reporting on litigation being pressed by a parent of a child who appeared on the program.

Because three children did drink bleach, I find it hard to believe they "complied with all laws". Health and Human Services within the state of New Mexico (as with most states) has requirements on accessibility of fire (stoves) and chemicals by those under 14, which all attending members were.

So, CBS's claim that this was run as a camp, which does, you are correct, subvert the law in regards to acting requirements, doesn't mean they are free of the constraints of Health & Human Services for child care safety.

That's the issue a parent is suing over, and one that will be decided in a court of law.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/18/ar...ion/18kid.html

The state of New Mexico is specifically launching a state-run investigation into whether CBS violated the state laws regarding Health & Safety during child care

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/show...w-seaso-1.html

So, pardon the rest of us when we look at this:


And prefer to wait.

If you'd like to send your kids to a day care so poorly managed that dangerous chemicals are left out so that kids can poison themselves and be hospitalized, be my guest. Right now we have two seperate legal actions (one by two parents who say they believe the show would hold to health & safety regulations; the other by the state). I'll wait until that outcome.

Thankfully, their is already some rebellion. An affiliate not too far from us has already elected not to air the program (period).

 

[BrianW]

If you're going to accuse others of pursuing an agenda at the expense of child safety, it would help if you were to avoid the appearance of doing the same.

 

[Brian^K]

There are always going to a few self-centered affiliates out there who will pander to the media circus. Again, though, it really benefits CBS, since those few affiliates taking such stupid actions boosts the ratings so much more on the rest of the network.

 

[Chris]

I absolutely believe no one was present when the events were happening. Or god, I hope so. If there is video out there of kids drinking bleach then everyone who was nearby deserves the harshest penalty imaginable (like reckless endangerment).

Here's the laws in the state of Kansas, as an example. If I run a day care for children, I have to have 1 adult for every 6 children. I have rules about what chemicals can have in my building. There are rules about what kind of plumbing I have to have. I'm required to have an eye cleaning station in my bathrooms. And I have to have at least one emergency first aid kit on site for every 10 students that I care for, present or not.

The thing is, care providers face different rules. And they have to precisely because they are not parents.

As to your concern that I'm leaping to conclusions, maybe I have lept to the conclusion this isn't a program I'm interested in. However, what is said above is not really "leaps" more statements of fact. Nobody at CBS is denying that three kids drank bleach. Nobody is denying that a kid burned himself. Just facts. Lots of us are interested in how this cooks out for CBS.

Think about it this way:

At my house, I think the last time I had the temperature checked for maintenance on my deep freezer was.. well, never.

At a client (Taco Bell) they are required to have a log which keeps their freezer temperature everyday. They have to check it twice a day and have recorded readings so that when they go through a health inspection they pass.

The standards a corporation or an entity is held to are simply different then those that parents are held to. CBS will be asked questions in a legal sense by an attorney representing the parents, and by an attorney representing the state of New Mexico will ask the same questions.

Like people were interested in the Michael Vick situation, people are interested in this because it strikes many as something that seems wrong. We do not know the whole story. But so far, as the story has unfolded, it has not given many of us who had an initial repulsion to the concept much reason to rethink our idea.

And Brian, the reason why some of us here ask why you leap to the defense of CBS, if you or friends/family work there is because in three seperate threads, revolving around cancellation of programs, scheduling changes, and now Kid Nation, you've lept to the defense of the management and asserted any second guesser was simply wrong.

It's a wry push that we think is fun, because it highlights that we feel that you are representing a close-minded view on this in the other direction. While you perceive those of us who dislike the concept as being close minded about the possibility this is a good program, you fail to consider that any of us who think there may be something wrong have any valid point.

I concede you may be right, there may have simply been truly unruly kids who tried to wreck the program and caused all the problems.

I hope you are willing to concede the point that there is a reason why injuries to kids in an environment represented to the state as a child-care (camp) facility have to be investigated, in the same manner that any other facility would be investigated.. in the same way a Taco Bell with roaches would be investigated

It's just that this investigation will garner more press and interest because it's playing out nationally. Whereas, say, an investigation of last year locally (a was injured on a slide being thrown off by a bully) resulted in city/county investigation that cleared all parties.. but still, it had to be looked into. It's the law in our state. And, considering I've checked all fifty states in regards to Health & Human Safety laws governing child care, I know it's the law where you live too.