Gadget Show naughtiness
A touch of naughtiness from Jason on last night's Gadget Show when discussing what the boys want for Christmas.
'A life-size Suzi Perry doll with changeable boots and heels, wearing a jumper that's too short to be called a dress. With a string on the back of her head that when pulled makes it say [Midlands accent] "Hello I'm Suzi Perry"'
Yep I'm sure there are many out there that wouldn't object to finding that under the tree.
To be honest I've stopped watching the show, the gadgets they do tend to be a bit superfluous or run to extremes. I mean there Best Buy televisions offer a choice of Big or Small LCD or Plasma, with the small topping out at 26" and the big starting at 42"; you know there are ones in-between too?
A fine example last night was Suzi's choice of gadget - a £4,500 21:9 ratio television. Yeah I'll have two. Sure it's nice to see the future (and didn't I say that once the 16:9 starting bottoming out cinema ratio will be the next thing?), but at times it seems a programme dedicated to The Shiny.
Sure the reviews can be good at times in that they try to perform real-world tests, but the show seems to have just edged over into shiny for the sake of shiny.
And while I understand why there's a question for the competition, the question itself shows the level they seem to be aiming at - "On which date in December is Christmas Day traditionally celebrated in the UK?" Oh and it's multiple choice too.
4 comments:
Heh, and I was expecting you to tell me they were testing out the latest “gadgets” from the Ann Summers winter collection… ;-)
I never really liked the show in the first place. But I wonder, do the manufacturers pay them to look at certain stuff?
As for the “competition”… Epic Failure seems too small to describe this. It's a lottery, pure and simple. (Maybe it's some kind of age-verification system?)
I think that's the 18-only New Year show :-)
With the competition I've mentioned this before it's due to gambling laws.
Roughly speaking if it's just a case of give us your name and pick a winner it's a game of chance; if you have to answer a question it's a game of skill. Different rules apply as to how they can be conducted.
Staying on topic I am impressed by Five's FlashForward competition questions which are actually about the programme and require you to have watched that particular episode.
Ha! So even if the question is one that a 3-year old child could answer, that's “skill”? The law never ceases to amaze me. ;-)
What does MP3 actually stand for?
Now that would make an interesting question. How many people (apart from me) actually know this one? ;-)
Not quite. To un-simplify it a bit more if you run a game of chance you need a licence, if you run a game of skill you don't.
In this instance a game of chance can be defined as one which doesn't prevent "a significant proportion of people from taking part" or "a significant proportion of people who do take part from receiving a prize."
So if the question would be deemed of no challenge then it could fall under my first point in that success isn't dependent "to a substantial degree on the exercise of skill, knowledge, or judgement."
Post a Comment