http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;j...storyID=7165230

Ya know, I had proposed that concept here some time ago (under the title "Hoosier Daddy") and got a lukewarm response and now it's a series. I guess real producers do come here to get concepts (or more probably it's a case of two minds with the same thought.)

Pedro Martinez will be a celeb contestant picking from a random group of New York Yankees.

Hmm, don't we already have a show like this on the air? It's called "Maury"!

There is NO WAY I'm going to watch this.

This past summer, Jeff "Dougie" Zucker at NBC said that Fox had stolen the concept from them (they supposdly had it under development). Fox denied anything, but now...

Considering the awful ratings performance reality's had for Fox in the past six months (except for "Simple Life 2"), the imminent return of "Idol"'s probably the only thing that's saving Mike Darnell's butt right now. This show isn't going to help matters for him.

A group of us three or four years back tried to come up with the most revolting game/reality show ideas we could think of. Whose Your Daddy? (same title) was one of them, although my version had celebrities questioning the three potential fathers while the DNA tests were being processed. Several other of our ideas have had elements that have made it on to other shows like Russian Roulette.

Our favorite idea was to have a game where there would be an enclosed room. Without notice, two holes open up in the ceiling. Out of one of them falls $1,000,000. Out of the other falls a knife. The game ends after 10 minutes. This is called Your $1,000,000 Chance of a Knifetime.

One of our other ideas we actually have a promo for:Promo #1 (1.3 MB AVI)

Consider it an early Christmas present.


--Mike

You know...I thought I was the only one on this earth that thought the same EXACT thing about his show.

That would be GREAT in an afternoon strip with What's That Smell and Dumpster Hunt... :)

Apparently, "Shut Up And Fish" has been permanently shelved...

And there are already complaints.
Adoptive parents and national adoption organizations are going after Fox. They call it “offensive, voyeuristic and exploitative,” which only makes me think they haven’t seen much network TV lately.

Sure, I'll go on national TV and risk proving to the nation that I can't pick out my biological father from a group of three. That wouldn't be the least bit humiliating.

OK here's what you do: your "team of challengers" consists of the subject's biological father, the milkman and the postman. If the subject picks either the milkman or the postman, this tells us what?

(It tells us that some DNA testing is in order.)

I tried to imagine the most revolting idea a year or two ago. When 20/20 had the story in which couples were being considered as prospective parents for a kid (or maybe a pair of siblings), I thought it sounded like a revolting reality show, but I topped it by reversing the roles: Six to twelve kids (picture one of those Mexican paintings) audition to be adopted by a couple. Just to make it really "poignant," the couple chooses on a live broadcast a few days before Christmas. Newt Gingrich could host.

That's the worst that I could actually believe them doing. Two others are so far beyond the pale that even I would be surprised: One is basically Running Man; the other has a bunch of people who need the same organ and are compatible for the same one.

Okay, this is one where I have to add my two cents worth.

I happen to have two adopted sisters (they were adopted from China). For any network to promote and air a show that exploits the emotions of an adopted child is cruel and revolting. I'm sure when my sisters get older (they're currently 8 and 6), they'll want to find out more about who their biological parents are, and unfortunately, we will never know who they are, since they were both abandoned shortly after birth.

I have to take the side of the adoptive parents and the national adoption organizations on this one. Shame all over FOX for diving to the depths of taste once again for the sake of ratings and the all-mighty dollar. If NewsCorp had any cojones whatsoever, it would immediately fire Mike Darnell. He's nothing but a low-life scumbag as far as I'm concerned for even greenlighting this "show."

Andrew M. Greenstein

I don't think anyone's disagreeing with your sentiments. I think everyone is more in the "duh" camp. :)

They're Fox. They've done this. There is not a single shred of evidence to suggest they will not continue to do this.

The question being asked is "how could they do such a thing" when the question REALLY is "why in the blue hell are people still surprised when Fox does this?"

There is no hope for this channel. None. It's beyond any redemption.

I cannot believe the same people who run the FOX News Channel on cable also authorize this kind of sleazy garbage on free TV. No wait, I can believe it. They really don't have any convictions.

FNC has almost no direct connection to the Fox Network. The former actually has very little presence in L.A. other than a bureau from which Gloria Allred, Susan Estrich, etc. make their appearances.

And just when you thought reality television has already scraped the bottom of the barrel & WHAM! this comes along. I don't think Fox will ever learn that stuff like this appears to have run its course right now. Three or four years ago, sure it was hip to do something like that. Now, it's just more junk thrown at us. PLEASE! I'd rather watch Amazing Race than this.

The only connection is that Rupert Murdoch makes a lot of money playing both ends against the middle.

In the past, this is where I would come in and mention "The Simpsons"/"Arrested Development"/"24"/fill-in-your-fave-Fox-scripted-series-here, but I wonder--has Mike Darnell's swill kept more people from wanting to sample something like "Arrested Development" and have people vowed that except for "The Simpsons" and some sports event, they have no interest in watching Fox at all?

(Until, of course, "Idol" comes back.)

I heard some of the guys in the lunchroom today discuss the show and offer their disdain for the whole thing..but it strikes me as interesting that it seems one network gets the most reaction out of people through it's programming, and it keeps that buzz going everywhere it can. If it's true that there is no such thing as bad publicity, Fox sure keeps people talking about it. I never hear people talk with any interest about the WB or UPN, especially in emotional tones. Fox really pushes buttons. People might talk about Desperate Housewives or Lost, but I rarely hear them say, "Boy, that ABC network is something, isn't it?" Only Fox seems to be the net name people think is cool or want to wash their mouth out after saying it.

Couple things:

Best I can tell from the omnipresent promos, this is a one-time thing, a 90-minute special, not a full blown series. If people watch, they'll make more. Pretty much the way TV has always worked.

On the subject of undeveloped revolting ideas, I'm always reminded of the one Chuck Barris claimed he always wanted to do. He was going to call it Greed (this long before Woolery's quizzer). Three contestants are presented with an offensive task. The example, as I recall, was to kick someone's crutches out from under him. The contestants would then bid down from some high amount to see which one would be willing to do the deed for the least amount of money.


I don't think so. Short of an organized boycott (which for televisions shows hardly ever works anyway), you watch the shows that you want to watch, regardless of what channel they happen to be on. I'm as repulsed by the FOX reality shows as anybody, but it doesn't keep Arrested Development off my Tivo, nor 24 or even American Idol when their time comes.

Of course, if you've seen Barris' movie "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind", you will know of his rather "dark" proposal for "The Old Game".

-Joe R.

This just sounds like a really twisted version of To Tell The Truth. Fremantle didn't have anything to do with this, did they?

More like The Dating Game. As I understand it there will be one questioner and three challengers.

Think of it from the producer's perspective. If you came up with the idea for this show, which network would you pitch it to first? Hint: not CBS, not WB.

I think you've happened upon the super-secret special twist for the next installment. The adoptee goes on dates with 8 older men, then is told that one of them is her birth father.

After, of course, being told that she was adopted in the first place.

Chris -
You do bring up a good point. What I wonder is - depending on just how the producers originally developed the format, perhaps other networks may have been open to the idea if they had the opportunity to do it their way. In other words, if it were pitched to CBS as a touching reunion between an adopted girl wanting to meet her birth father and she could meet a small handful of men and try to guess which is her father based on personality traits - done tastefully, it could be sold as a heartwarmer. The net, sensitive of it's image, will guide the show the way they feel the most comfortable with it. It may not be that the concept is necessarily tasteless - it's how you want to present it. So again, if you want to go for emotional agony and twisting a knife in the heart, Fox would be open for the reason stated earlier - people will talk about us, and talk equals promotion, so who cares if they hate us, as long as they talk about us? I agree the producer will pitch an idea to a net based on the net's track record and what works for them. After all, Match Game became What The Blank in Fox's hands. Does anyone know if the producers started out with that title and concept, or did Fox want an edgier name/concept?

See a pattern:

New Press Your Luck = Whammy!

Match Game = What the Blank

What next?

Come on Down = The All New Price is Right

The reunion idea is not new. "Truth or Consequences" and "It Could Be You" did it years ago with decorum.

I've heard that Darnell often comes up with a lot of these himself and then farms them out to his favored list of suppliers. Sometimes I wonder what shows, if any, Rocket Science have actually come up with *themselves.*

Fremantle's not involved--and they've tended to come in to Fox in the past with something that Darnell didn't come up with ("The Swan" can be blamed totally at the feet of Nely Galan, who for one brief shining moment actually had a hit show in a stunningly mediocre career) or something that's already been done elsewhere ("Idol," "The Complex," "What the Blank?").

I may have deduced why FOX never flew this flag. The pilot turned out to have better taste that they thought it would, so they passed on moving it along to series.
The foregoing is all Don Howard Theory--based entirely on conjecture.

And as for the original Who's Your Daddy? concept, well, my wife and I did that nearly four years ago.

The Great One did it again....

Do you have any more tricks up your sleeve, Curt?

The Running Man? Hey, didn't the idea for "American Gladiators" come from that Schwarzenegger masterpiece?

Or of course, the one, true, original reality television show that's still on the air after all these decades:

THE NEWS!!!!! (especially for much more on the tsunami aftermath in Asia)

I thought that would be "The Insider".
Who's a host of that show, again?

The name evades me, but damn, he's good.

I AGREE! :-D :-D :-D

Chuck Donegan (The Veering-Into-Dangerous-Territory "Chuckie Baby")

Actually, I think it was done as the miniseries "Lace," with Phoebe Cates.
"Which one of you b*st*rds is my father?"
(and surprised Fox didn't borrow that to plug this series.)

Let's count so far... Curt has come up with Who's Your Daddy?, accurately predicted what the end game for Balderdash would be if there was ever a TV adaptation... what else?

That plug would not sit well with the FCC. Fox is already in their doghouse for that one ep of Married by America.


Curt, who's going to win the Super Bowl in February?

Actually, Curt also predicted the Balderdash gameplay as well.

There's a reason he's known as The Great One.

Well..one FOX station won't be airing "Who's Your Daddy"....
http://apnews1.iwon.com//article/20050103/...G=home&SEC=news

According to that story, FOX has already shot six of these little babies.

Also, the ironic line of the week has to go to this FOX spokesman:

"The special was thoroughly vetted by our standards and practices department to ensure that it was appropriate for broadcast"

Oh, yeah, we here at FOX think it's just swell!

So the game isn't rigged and no one says "hell" or "damn". But ya gotta love the concept.

The same station that's passed before on Fox reality shows dealing with sexual situations, including both installments of "Temptation Island" and "Married by America." WRAZ's sister station WRAL (both owned by a local concern) also turned down Simon Cowell and Fremantle's "Cupid" from CBS when it aired summer before last--replacing it with "Andy Griffith" reruns. There's a pattern here.

And no wardrobe malfunctions. I don't see a thing wrong with this show.
Oh, yes. I know. I was raised by civilized beings.