20/20 Adoption Story - Disgusting!!! (1 Viewer)

[Bob Turnbull]

John Stewart led off The Daily Show tonight by showing the initial ad for Friday's 20/20 adoption story. He didn't really have to say much as it really spoke for itself.

 

[JustinCleveland]

Ooh, thanks for the heads-up, Bob. I hadn't seen the promo and look forward to catching a replay today!

Thanks!

 

[MikeAlletto]

I'm sure someone would complain, they have that right to voice their opinion and disagree with the program. But at the end of the day it is the complainer that must choose whether to watch or not. Last time I checked tv signals were not beamed directly into our eyeballs.

 

[Robert Ringwald]

It's not about being offended, its about "How far is too far?"

If this is allowed... it may not be long before we see
"Buy Me A Kidney!" Where contestants answer questions in order to win a much needed organ.

The point is it's purely exploitational, and makes the world seem tasteless as a whole.

 

[Moe Maishlish]

While I agree that this kind of programming is in extreme poor taste, I'm forced to agree with Mike's perspective on the situation.

The fact is that poor taste is not illegal. We all have different levels of sensitivity, curiosity, and taste, and we can't expect everyone else to react of feel the same way we do to any situation. Without venturing into territory that could potentially violate forum rules, it's our upbringing, our religious beliefs, and our experiences in life that contribute & dictate the way we see these things, and although insensitive, we can't expect everyone to react the same way.

The sad fact is that some people thrive in their voyerism, and derive immense amounts of please from other people's misery and suffering. The Networks realize this kind of programming sells, and air it. There's a demand for it, and there's money to be made. This is no different than any other aspect of our economy, except the flavor of the product being sold.

Personally, I hate reality TV. I find Survivor boring & contrived, The Bachelor/Bachelorette/Joe Millionaire/etc. smutty & exploitative, Fear Factor dangerous & disgusting, and The Apprentice a pathetic display of arrogance & egocentricity. As a result, I'm not a regular viewer, but I can accept that other people find these shows riviting. The only "reality TV" based concept that I actually like is COPS, as it's actually real and doesn't involve some manufactured situations that are then edited to death with cheezy soundtracks and annoying hosts.

Our choices are to watch, or not to watch. This is a byproduct of our freedom of choice, and our freedom of expression. We're all free to say what we want, but we have to allow others the same freedoms to express what they want.

Eventually, I think this entire phase of "Reality TV" is going to wear out, and we're really going to look back and ask ourselves what we find so entertaining about this kind of programming. At that point, society in general is probably going to get board with the entire concept of "Reality TV", and it'll disappear from the networks alltogether.

Moe.

 

[Erik.Ha]

Wow... ABC is really missing the boat... They should be lobbying congress to get rid of that pesky 13th amendment, so they can produce "Who Wants to Purchase a Slave."

There is a moral question here that goes FAR beyond whether it's on TV or not. This process sounds disturbing whether or not a TV camera happens to be recording it. Add the camera and the obvious profiteering on people's shattered lives and its really hard to pretend it doesn't stink.

Human Beings should not be the prize in a contest. Putting the contest on Television doesn't make it any more palatable than a back alley white-slavery ring.

 

[Quentin]

I'm all about a truly free society, and I support ALL expression. Even this crap.

But, this thread is about being appalled with the crap and doing something about it. That's ok too! If no one ever did anything about the crap (no outrage, no protest letters, no complaining calls), then it would eventually become acceptable and no longer be considered crap.

So, Mike, while you are right to a degree - it is America, it's just TV, and turn it off if you don't likey - you are also dead wrong. It's not "that simple". It may be "just TV" to you...but, it's clearly more than that to others. It's crap, and they're pissed. So, give them the freedom of expression you're so willing to give to TV, and it will all sort itself out in the end. That's the process. Do you really think any of us offended by this ad will WATCH the show? No, we won't. But, complaining has its place as well.

 

[Moe Maishlish]

(Network problems... so this is my second time typing up this response)

So Eric, are you proposing that the entire child-adoption process be abolished? The sad truth here (as in any child-adoption situation) is that of the multiple candidate couples, only one will be able to adopt the child, while the others will unfortunately be passed over. It's a very unfortunate situation, but it would still be "contest" whether it was broadcast on TV or not. I'll tell you that I'd take this over any other alternative though - I'd rather see a child grow up in a happy & healthy environment with adoptive parents than in an unfit home.

One other point that I really want to address here (and which has been mentioned on several occasions). Adoption is not slavery! Adoptive Parents are not in the market to adopt a child to make into their personal servants. Most couples have nothing but the best & most noble intentions when entering into the adoption process, and wouldn't dream of mistreating the child. Furthermore, Child Welfare & Social Services do quite a lot of background checking & discovery before selecting potential parents, and would not stand idly by and hand a child into a dangerous or damaging environment. I personally know several people who were adopted as baby's, and they were brought up in very loving & caring environments, with every opportunity available to them. So let's just stop with this whole insulting & completely inaccurate suggestion of adoption equating slavery.

Moe.

 

[MikeAlletto]

Yeah, a mother giving up a baby to a loving family because she can't take care of it. Sounds like a back alley white-slavery ring to me. Talk about being overly dramatic. Why don't we throw a story in there about drug abuse, alcoholism and an abusive boyfriend. Might as well as long as we are making it all about the drama.

Making assumptions about what the episode will actually be like even though no one has seen it yet. Haven't you ever see the commercial for the "next time on a very special ER, the BEST episode of the season, the episode where all hell breaks lose. And you don't want to miss the first...5...minutes..." But when you tune in it is actually nothing but a ploy to get you to watch? How about we reserve judgement until the episode actually airs?

Who knows, the point of the episode may be to draw into the public eye how wrong an open adoption is and to show families who want the kid and all the horrible hoops they have to jump through. The point is NONE of you know what it is truely about unless you've already seen it.

 

[Randy Tennison]

Many different people, many different feelings.

Since I started the post, I want to clarify my thought process. I am in no way condeming the young lady, the people involved, or the process of adoption. No drawing a coorelation to slavery, no dispute over freedom of the airwaves, no demand for censorship.

What I was offended by was ABC's explotation of this very personal, very emotional situation. ABC made it into a game show. Who Wants To Win A Baby?!? And that I found disgusting.

ABC has every right to market this 20/20 episode as they see fit. They have every right to air it as they see fit. And I, as a consumer, have every right to let them know how I feel about their programming choice, and every right to spread the word to others, and ask their support in letting ABC know how they feel.

And apparently, ABC has realized that they made a huge mistake. They have pulled the offending show promos, and, according to an insider, are desperately re-editing the show to remove any resembelence to a reality show. According to the insider, they will be re-editing up until broadcast time.

Millions of people were offended, and many expressed their views. People believed that ABC had crossed a line that society does not want crossed. Rather than simply "changing the channel", they chose to change ABC's perception of what is acceptable. And their protest has worked.

As someone who is in the process, right now, of adopting a child, I thank everyone who didn't sit by, but got involved. That's the way our country works. And if more people express their opinions, rather than turning a blind eye, our country will be a better place for the child I will eventually be blessed with.

 

[Chris]

Slight difference though.. as I said, I have a first cousin adopted through this process. But in that instance, none of the prospectives and adoptee mother were video taped, for profit so that a network could make quick money off of the situation.. which ABC will... in fact, they hoped to make slightly more then a million.

I believe heartily in adoption, but I can't agree with a network station using those involved to profit. It demeans everything about it.

As to "TV can air anything/everything" I don't know. TV will/can air what the market will bear. And part of that is the consumers saying they find X unacceptable, etc. and making it known.. that's part of the free speech rights of the viewer.

This is where people fail to understand: 20/20 is NOT a free speech issue. It is PAID speech, and they are not being stopped by the government for saying/doing what they want. Should they chose to stop because of any economic motive - unhappy audience, etc. then that's how it goes. Same way TV shows get canceled. If someone were to run an alternative signal and quash ABC from being seen in any market, that would be an issue.. but if consumers want to protest, good for them.

I am pretty open about what's on TV. This I just find sickening, and I do find it very equivelent to white slavery.. if this adoption were done without the cameras, that's the process and how it is, and I believe in that. But if this process is made into TV for money, you've injected an unhealthy mechanism into this.

Someone commented about how the child will feel later.. I'm not sure about that.. she may find a great home this way, but now that it's all documented like this, with all the blow-by-blow play, don't you think she might also be open to say "wow, why did you chose X instead of Y" so on, and so on.

I just find the entire thing distasteful and I won't watch. But I also think if ABC wanted to show the inside of the process they could do it.. but the moment they started marketing it the way they did they basically became a pimp, IMHO

 

[Patrick Sun]

Of course, the irony is, by starting this topic, how many more people will tune in due to morbid curiousity, rather than missing the show altogether because they don't usually watch shows on Friday nights?

If this type of stuff bothers you, send your comments to ABC, AND their advertisers, that's usually how distasteful shows get canned.

 

[Nelson Au]

Just thought I'd add something here. Maybe someone already said it, I cannot pretend to understand the issue here and I feel for you if you're offended by the 20/20 story. I just wanted to add this one small bit of information, not meant to be on anyone's side, I'm neutral here.

I happen to be home today and I saw Barabara Walters on Good Morning America. Charlie Gibson grilled her on the 20/20 piece and the way it was promoted. Her reply is, yes a producer thought that by going for the competitive angle, it would keep the average viewer from clicking away. She said it was a mistake and they are very sorry for it. And as you know the ads have been removed.

She goes on to say that ABC and 20/20 had no input here on the story. They didn't ask the families to participate, or the mother to participate or as far as I could tell, wanted to do this piece. Barbara Walters herself though did adopt her daughter, so perhaps for her, it was of personal interest to do the story. The mother herself and the families did want the story told and invited the cameras. This kind of adoption process apparently is growing to be more accepted she said.

That's about all I recall of the short piece on GMA.

Nelson

 

[Randy Tennison]

Thanks, Nelson. And to clarify my stance, I am not opposed to a story that shows the true process of open adoption. What I was offended by was the marketing of the program as a television competition, ala Bachelor, Apprentice, Survivor, which is precisely how ABC tried to promote this piece.

As they are re-editing the program to take away any parts that appear to fit those criteria, I tend to dismiss the pleas of innocence from Walters. According to news articles



I will not be watching.

 

[Ted Lee]

agreed. now that society has deemed just about anything viable for tv viewing, who knows when it's going to stop. pretty soon we'll have episodes of "the running man" (the arnold s. flick) on tv.

somewhere, we have to draw the line. there still needs to be a "reasonable" level of morality and modicum on tv.

everyone knows what impact and influence tv has on peoples lives. what do we all think the american family is? look at the brady's. what is the next coolest thing to have? check the current advertisements -- don't forget that advertising *creates* a need. blah, blah, blah...you get my point.

with such a powerful medium as tv, we better try to keep some things in check.

there is nothing wrong with showing the adoption process, it's pros and cons. presenting it as a reality-based tv show is wrong -- clearly abc saw the error of their ways. would they have changed anything if people didn't complain -- probably not.

in this case, the public spoke ... and spoke correctly.

 

[ChrisMatson]

I don't get the point. It seems those are deeply personal beliefs.

A serious look at the issues through a series of stories on families seeking to adopt, the foster care system in the United States, the adoption process (both domestic and international), and people with unwanted babies or unwanted pregnancies would be fascinating.

As for the upcoming show, I think I'll pass.

 

[Ted Lee]

i don't think they're deeply personal ... heck, i think most people would agree that tv is a powerful medium.

i guess my point is that tv has the power of persuasion.

it can shape peoples belief systems, influence what they want to do, where they want to go, what they want to wear, etc. moreso ... it can influence what they think is right and wrong.

the point is if we don't put at least some sort of standard on tv, the long-term effect it could have on society could be very scary.

if we start letting stupid shows like this one (i'm talking about the original concept) ... then it's all downhill.

 

[Jason_Els]

From Bangladesh: Who Wants to Rent a Child Prostitute?

From The Sudan: Who Wants to Buy a Slave?

From Saudi Arabia: Who Wants to See a Public Beheading/Stoning/Amputation?

From The Netherlands: Who Wants to Assist a Suicide?

(all de-facto legal in their respective countries)

People are bought, sold, tortured and made spectacles of the world over on a daily basis. I fear our society is going the way of Rome, declining into history while we spend time indulging in the grotesque fascinations the Colosseum of Television presents us; ever more fantastic, ever more lurid stories pandering to the lowest common denominator to bring in viewers.

I always supposed it would come to this but I was hoping it wouldn't be so soon.

 

[Wayne Bundrick]

Wow. People are pissed off because a news show promoted something that is more real than a reality show as if it was merely a reality show. One can only hope that the backlash signals the beginning of the end of all these reality shows.

 

[Patrick Sun]

I caught the last 30 minutes of the program, and it wasn't as bad as some detractors had predicted. Open adoption was the main focus of the show tonight. It's presented as having more risk than closed adoptions due to the people involved in the process because of the risk of the birth mother becoming too needy and demanding (i.e. wanting to be there for the good times while relegating the rest of the child rearing to the adoptive parents, pretty playing the grandparent role while skipping out on the less-than-glamorous times).