Do We Need Another Queen for a Day?

I grew up watching Queen for a Day, where some of the saddest people in America appeared on TV screens for 20 years to tell their heart-wrenching tales of family illness, unemployment, unfortunate circumstances, bad luck and other reasons why they should be determined by the studio audience's applause-meter to be named most in need of shiny new appliances and non-perishable food products.

I felt so badly for those poor women, who not only had to publicly expose their hardships, but then hope the audience found them more pitiful than the other unfortunate women on the show.

As product placement and reality became synonymous with television, I thought audiences had been spared the obsolete Queen for a Day. Oprah said she didn't want her "giving" show renewed, thus forcing less people to humiliate themselves. Younger generations would never have to see the gawdy cape, wand and crown, which I assume were collected from the winner Queen as soon as the show ended.

Darn. "Queen gamer holding court at RDF USA" headlined the Hollywood Reporter, with the news that the "long-running reality game show" was being pitched to broadcast and cable networks. The key now, as one of the executives was quoted saying, is the show is "advertiser friendly."

I know television needs advertising, but what is the saturation level? Product placement impacts television's talent competitions, endurance tests, sports and fitness challenges and psychological exercises. Isn't Queen for a Day taking it too far?

Comments

[wayoutleft]

wasn't the original host jack bailey? bailey, gene rayburn, garry moore, bill cullen, et al. were masters of integrating sales presentation with live gameshow formats. the tone they set was always pitch-perfect- as it has to be- to elicit audience empathy within an effective format for product presentation. that presentation was very forthright by today's standards. the hosts would direct the audience to "a word from our sponsors" in a forthright friendly way that connected sponsoring products to the show and to the audience. today's style is frenetic, hip, demanding... leaving the mass audience behind sometimes.

[JScott]

I rather watch the reverse of that show 'Pauper for a Month', where whiny pretentious celeb wealthy people (like Paris Hilton, The Kardashians etc.) are poor and destitute for a month, yeah probably wouldn't an easy sell the product placement is probably the pitts-the cardboard boxes that contained the product placed prizes from 'Queen For A Day' .

[3fingerbrown]

"Queen for a Day" was 50 years ahead of its time, like other shows of the 1950s and early '60s in which people demeaned and debased themselves for a few bucks and five minutes of fame in what we now call reality-based programming.

There's nothing new under the TV sun. Most of what is presented by anti-literate, morally bankrupt TV producers of today was actually dreamed up by anti-literate, morally bankrupt TV producers of the 1950s (who based their programs on those of anti-literate, morally bankrupt radio producers of the '30s and 40s). "Survivor" was just Art Linkletter's "People Are Funny" on steroids. And what is "American Idol" but "Ted Mack's Original Amateur" with a budget?

The technology evolves, the hosts get smarmier, the volume louder, but there's a constant: the American bumpkin's dream of parlaying a meager talent into fame and fortune always provides exquisitely humiliating moments when played out on the big stage.

[MsLiz]

I nominate Nash what's her name, the Pennsylvania woman who asked Obama why he did not wear the flag pin.

[Leper]

We already have a "Queen For A Day" show. It's called "Extreme Home Makeover".

[CoulterIsASuccubus]

Let's call it "Touched By A Bush" and the people could relate how George Bush has abandoned them. We could have hurricane victims, wives and mothers of dead soldiers, people with cancer and no health insurance, women who have miscarried and been poisoned by industrial pollution, and of course, for bigger ratings, some mentally ill homeless who hear voices.

[mlaiuppa]

I think it's indicative of both our bad economy and our reality-show enrapture that a show like this would be considered for updating. American viewing audiences delight in watching the misfortunes of others. They won't have any problems finding poor schmucks willing to humiliate themselves for a toaster. And they won't have any problem finding sponsors willing to unload their unsellable junk. I'll bet all of the cars will be GM SUVs, especially once gas hits $5.00 a gallon.

[longislandlol]

Let's start the show with Katrina victims-

[jeff01]

If the size of the prizes matched the contestants' problems, it might be tolerable. There must be a new idea. Anything is better than this.

[kaseybandit]

I'll never forget those dreary black-and-white images of this poor women. How about "King for a Day" if they have to bring it back?

[ramal]

Haven't though of that show in years. My Grandmother and I used to love to watch it. I suppose in thinking about it now it (Queen For a Day) was one of the first "reality" shows. Isn't it odd that with over 100 channels to choose from so many people end up watching shows from the 1950's and 1960's? That bespeks volumes about the state of current television programming. Just as with shows like "Jerry Springer" people either watch it because they are bored with their own life's or need to feel better about themselves by seeing someone worse off. I agree, put it to bed, along with all the other "reality" shows.

[Newyorkgal]

I used to get so depressed when my mother watched that show. I was always afraid I'd end up like some of those women -- being forced to beg for furniture on television. I wondered what the contestant's children thought when their mother was on TV saying how poor they were. My mother said that wouldn't happen to us, but I was always worried. So far, so good, but I'd hate to see the show return.

[johnwinner]

Hillary thinks she deserves the title - for life - she will take it to the conmvention. The Democratic Party is probably doomed; the superderlegates need to back Obama NOW! - I wish I could see the humor in this, but I don't, there's too much at stake.

[Chip1222]

Please, please, please don't make suffering a platorm for product exposure. I remember those women on the original show saying they needed medical help and getting some appliances, dishes or carpeting they would never be able to use.

[kalala]

Isn't it sad what people have to do sometimes to get healthcare in this country? But now, instead of appliances and dishes, maybe they will hand out gasoline and "get out of foreclosure" cards. Now there's some product placement!

[lolyla]

Everything is a platform for product exposure.