After finishing “Quiz Show” on Netflix, I was shocked not only by how easy it was to spoof the show, but also by how effective a change in direction was had for each individual. I think the manipulation of the game was easily distinguishable as a terribly bad idea and ultimately the closure was for the best. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Regarding the game show and my personal views, I would never have accepted the rigged game. Despite all the fame and glory that Charles Van Doren received during his reign, it was ultimately wrong for a multitude of reasons. For one thing, it presents a bad image to the public and puts me in the position of being someone I truly am not. I'm nowhere near as smart as some of the honest people on the show, and putting myself in the shoes of someone who claims to have incredible knowledge is deceptive and can impact the lives of those who truly possess that knowledge. Secondly, lying to the general public is never a good idea, especially when more than 50 million were watching it at a time. The backlash can be truly devastating and can ruin the lives of everyone involved. It is morally wrong to accept such an evil position as it can negatively affect everyone involved in the show and I could never burden such a fate on those people knowing it was my fault. Moral permissibilityThe interpretation of "Twenty-One" was to be shown introducing the audience to multiple figures of incredible knowledge and throwing them one on one in a battle of wits. When a game like this is rigged such that knowledge no longer has any jurisdiction in the show based on the fact that individuals are told not to answer certain questions, it corrupts the mentality of the show and ultimately puts it in a negative light . The moral legitimacy shown was clearly flawed and not permitted because the producers, actors, screenwriters, etc. Etc. they were all lying to the general public. If the show were to present these details upon the release of the show, no individual would find it interesting as it proves that the individual is not at all what he appears to be. As stated previously, you are put in someone else's shoes, and that person has an incredible knowledge base that many people only dream of having. In turn, faking this through the use of rigged questions and diving opponents puts the show in a realistic state and attracts ratings as the battle of the brains attracts the audience. A real battle of the brains would have involved some truly incredible people despite their background and history, thus bringing the sense of realism to these shows. The fact that producer Dan Enright decided to debut Charles Van Doren because of his background and not his experience details this point. Parallels to TodayUnfortunately, corruption and greed will still find their way, no matter the time or place. One such example would be the show House Hunters on HGTV. The show is based on a couple who simply go shopping for houses based on their budget, needs, family space, etc. However, it was reported in 2010 that the show detailed which house the contestants would purchase before the show even began. he continued, “They didn't even 'accept' us as a subject for the show until we closed on the house we were buying. ” This is easily an example of this as i. "