random item

Troperville

Tools

Find recent edits by troper:

back to: Main / ManipulativeEditing

edit article | go to discussion page

10th Jun '13 11:33:51 PM nombretomado

Send nombretomado a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 107 (click to see context) from:

* Contestants auditioning for ''AmericanIdol'' don't go directly to the celebrity judge panel; they first sing for staffers who try to sort people into "maybe good enough to be on the show", "not good enough to be on the show", and "so terrible it'll be funny". Former contestants have alleged that the producers spliced together footage of their initial screening by the staffers so as it make it appear that they were singing in front of Randi, Simon, and Paula. This apparently happens frequently if a contestant sings badly for the show's staffers and is put through to the judges as a "joke contestant", but then pulls it together and gives a significantly better performance before the judges. The producers simply edit things to make it appear that the "so bad it's funny" attempt was done before the judges, and the contestant's mildly-mediocre performance before the judges is never seen by viewers at home. This seems to explain instances where contestants appeared to give horrible performances that should have elicited scathing comments from Simon, but were dismissed with a much milder "sorry, it's just not good enough" comment.

to:

* Contestants auditioning for ''Series/AmericanIdol'' don't go directly to the celebrity judge panel; they first sing for staffers who try to sort people into "maybe good enough to be on the show", "not good enough to be on the show", and "so terrible it'll be funny". Former contestants have alleged that the producers spliced together footage of their initial screening by the staffers so as it make it appear that they were singing in front of Randi, Simon, and Paula. This apparently happens frequently if a contestant sings badly for the show's staffers and is put through to the judges as a "joke contestant", but then pulls it together and gives a significantly better performance before the judges. The producers simply edit things to make it appear that the "so bad it's funny" attempt was done before the judges, and the contestant's mildly-mediocre performance before the judges is never seen by viewers at home. This seems to explain instances where contestants appeared to give horrible performances that should have elicited scathing comments from Simon, but were dismissed with a much milder "sorry, it's just not good enough" comment.

31st May '13 7:00:56 AM FingerPuppet

Send FingerPuppet a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Added line(s) 229 (click to see context) :

9th May '13 8:23:59 AM MarsJenkar

Send MarsJenkar a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 147 (click to see context) from:

to:

8th May '13 8:17:51 AM PurpleShirt

Send PurpleShirt a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Added line(s) 276 (click to see context) :

* Some Sociology students on a college actually did this as a project - they intentionally amassed volunteers to showcase how this can paint an inaccurate picture about a social group. What they did was showcase the (Consentual) engineering students as complete idiots in one video; wherein they showcase engineers who cannot answer simple math questions and are unaware of who is running the country or simple historical facts. Meanwhile, the non-engineers get the questions all right, and can solve puzzles much faster than engineering students. 
** The ''second'' video showcases what they ''did not'' show. It started off with the volunteers being briefed on what it was, them consenting to it, and engineers ''intentionally'' answering questions wrong. (Trying [[RealityIsUnrealistic not to give too outlandish an answer, despite being told that people might actually believe they thought that]]) Also shown was how they "Randomly" selected someone from a crowd who happened to have been a volunteer who was planted there, always searched for someone who was tired or drinking coffee (Because they would be more likely to mess up), engineers taking their time solving a puzzle whereas the non-engineers were shown the solution ahead of time and had practiced, so they could place it together quickly.

7th May '13 1:27:29 PM MarsJenkar

Send MarsJenkar a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 81 (click to see context) from:

to:

Changed line(s) 147 (click to see context) from:

to:

27th Apr '13 9:42:28 AM Morgenthaler

Send Morgenthaler a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

No Circular Links.

Changed line(s) 4,6 (click to see context) from:

to:

Changed line(s) 13 (click to see context) from: