176
Mr. Beast sucks but also apparently lives in a hell of his own making
(www.polygon.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2024
176 points (100.0% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15908 readers
595 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Squid Game's conceit of death was meant to throw the perverse incentives and implications of regular game shows into sharp relief by means of exaggeration.
i'm rather with you for the complaints acting like the show was more important than it was, but it's a correct read to find the 'reality' adaptions as anathema to the themes of the original
I agree that its counter to the original I just dont think the original is important enough that you have to respect it. I haven't seen it but my RTV friends have said the Squid Game RTV show turned out to be some pretty good human drama lol so shrug . If thats odious to you then I do get it. I just dont really vibe with that. Maybe being a competitive RTV fan makes me biased, but I really don't think theres deep ethical problems with Survivor and such.
It sorta reminds me of Undertale. It makes a big moral deal of something that to me isnt morally wrong? In Undertale's case it was completionism, and in Squid Game's its game shows.
There is something to be said for the idea that using people who are desperate for money as entertainment is somewhat perverse. But I can tell you, as someone who consumes that kind of media, that shit doesnt really come across that often in the actual product. It certainly doesn't in Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy and whatever, and it only does a little bit in social strategy RTV when you see people's emotions over losing or being betrayed. But I don't think thats as perverse as Squid Game made it out to be. I dont think game shows or competitive rtv should be banned or anything.
I would absolutely prefer Survivor post-capitalism where everyones playing just for the game itself and the adventure. At least ethically, admitedly there being no money on the line does take some of the human drama out of it lol. People would probably take things less personally so that aspect of the intrigue of the show would be lessened. But I can put ethics first and see that as largely a good thing. And actually thinking of it, I've played online games of Survivor with no money on the line and people still take it seriously and get hurt by betrayals and shit so.
Kinda thinking aloud here as I go sorry. As a Survivor (and other competiive RTV) fan where thats my special interest, its a subject that interests me. And like other art that critiques my special interests in ways I find exagerated or unfair (Undertale for JRPGs, The Boys for superhero stuff [noteably tho I do like Watchmen so its not ALWAYS bad]) Squid Game is something that gives me mixed feelings because I can appreciate it as a piece of media and what its tryign to do, but also be kind of annoyed at what I think isnt really the fairest of criticisms.
i think the structural financial incentives designed to attract people who wouldn't otherwise consent to have cameras stuffed up their gills overrides the fact some of the people that find their way onto RTV are the performer sort that'd like to do it without the financial incentive.
I think youre making big assumptions! The current casting pool of Survivor is 100% superfans who are passionate about the show and want to be there. Thats the 'new era,'s whole deal.
You so rarely see "this was a bad experiance for me" in interviews (and ive read a lot of interviews) let alone "i wouldnt have done this if not for the money". I think ur just taking your own mindset and applying it to others inappropriately. I can count the number of people who have negative things to say about their survivor experiance on like maybe two hands, possibly just one. And a lot of those are people who did morally reprenesible things on or off the show and got exposed for that and dont like that fact!
Survivor had to rely on financial incentives before it had superfans, no?
but this is kind of moving the goalposts on what Squid Game set out to do. the text is explicit that it's condemning financial incentives for desperate people. this does apply to a lot of RTV in the present and past, but i can't imagine they were trying to condemn similar show formats that lack the financial coercion. Taskmaster seems totally irrelevant to Squid Game's thesis, despite superficial similarities in format.