Come on! You only have 60 seconds left to call in for a shot at $100! All you have to do is unscramble this famous proper noun! "TVTORPES"! Keep ringing those phones! We don't have all night! Call! Call now! note
A phone-in game show is Exactly What It Says on the Tin
. It is a logical extension of the concept of a Home Participation Sweepstakes
, except in this case, the whole
show is one. These are a form of live Game Show
where viewers can call in to a special number and hopefully get a chance to come on air to potentially win something by providing an answer to a question or logic puzzle. They were quite popular in Europe as a fixture of late-night television on commercial television channels, and even on dedicated quiz channels
that dedicated their lineup to just
this genre. If done right, they can at least be fun to watch
, and leave you wondering if you should even phone in and give it a shot yourself!
Despite the allure these programs have to viewers, they're not without controversy. But why, you ask? The idea of a phone-in game show is pretty much a trope on its own, because practically every single phone-in quiz show on Earth follows roughly the exact same series of events:
- Pose a question to the audience.
- Encourage people to phone in for a chance to win a prize by answering said question.
- Have the presenters pad things out with cheap talk and encouragement to keep calling in so you don't have to waste your precious airtime actually taking calls. (the Canadian game Brain Battle subverted this by having a studio game too, but eventually dropped it. So, where's the "battle" you speak of exactly?")
- Use a premium-rate phone number, so you can scrape money off callers. Offer an online entry form when legally required, but in any case, bury any of this important information in an Unreadable Disclaimer.
- Take few calls, or don't take any at all! Hope they don't actually have the winning answers, especially if you made the question ridiculously hard or ridiculously easy.
- Wash, rinse, repeat.
Some politicians and regulatory organizations have asserted that despite appearing to be a game of skill, these programs are essentially a form of gambling since you need to pay to play (in most cases, serving as the main revenue source), and the odds of even getting on-air (or even getting the answer right for that matter) are quite slim. In late 2006, these concerns became the conduit for part of series of scandals in Britain surrounding the use of premium-rate lines on television as a whole. Complaints surfaced that Quiz Call
producers had allegedly told its receptionists to completely ignore calls for a period (where they received 100 to 200 calls at 75p each), another show was accused of having their own staff
posing as winning callers, and of course, the whole thing about those "impossible" questions. The scandal also widened to include unethical non-quiz
phone-ins. Examples included inviting callers to request dedications on a show which had already been recorded, and ignoring the name which kiddies chose for the Blue Peter
At the first signs of the scandal, the damage had already been done: ITV shut down its all-games digital channel ITV Play and suspended all use of premium-rate lines across its programming, Channel Five got fined £300,000 for having such a show coming up with a fake winner's name on a daytime phone-in game, Channel Four sold off its stake in Quiz Call (which folded at the start of 2007, but came back for a time on Five), and quiz channels became an endangered species in the UK altogether (however, following the scandals, late-night blocks and channels dealing in interactive casino games such as roulette and bingo started popping up as an alternative).
Similar controversies have occurred elsewhere, though. In Belgium, a comedic consumer watchdog program (who, through a mess of Loophole Abuse
, also trolled a local music royalty society into demanding royalties for fictitious artists they made up from the names of kitchen products) actually managed to get one of their own undercover as the host of such a show, obtained information about mathematics puzzles they had been planning to use, and determined that 16% of the "correct" answers they had were completely wrong.
In the United States, the concept was mainly a middling to complete failure, with only Game Show Network
actually getting any attention. Other various attempts by TBS, Fox's television stations and the Tribune stations lasted a few weeks to months. Not helping was the ubiquity of Infomercials
and Byron Allen shows as time filler in dead periods, which are cheaper and only require the painstaking task
of queuing them to air after The Late Late Show
before you leave for the day (rather than needing to have the staff necessary to put on a live program at 2 in the morning; though in Europe, and recently in Canada, many are outsourced to companies such as the Budapest-based Telemedia InteracTV, who make their living producing these en masse
A large stigma of pay-per-call numbers in the US going back to the kid-targeted 1-900 lines of the late 80's and early 90's didn't help either; even with most of the contests using toll-free 1-800 numbers, a credit card was often required as a 'verification' measure which was charged an 'entry fee' unless the entry was made online, and once the state consumer protection agencies (and the possibility of different laws in conflict with each other) got involved, the networks decided the legal pain wasn't worth it to continue further (though the terrible ratings didn't help either). Note that in the United States most contests have 'no purchase necessary' requirements, but as the only way to enter without a purchase was via online or sending a physical postcard to the show, it was likely that a contest show could easily ignore the 'no purchase necessary' entry channels and only focus on phone entries.
To note, there are far too many of these shows to count, so this page will mainly be general to the genre since they're all rather similar.
Okay, you're on the air! Name us a trope relating to this type of show, one of them on the prize board is hiding $5,000!
- Bonus Round: Some of these shows offered bonus games to win jackpot prizes.
- Carried by the Hosts: It's a given, since we're often dealing with cheap, late-night entertainment here.
- Double The Dollars: Sometimes done as an incentive to "double the dialers"
- Excuse Question: Often, it boils down to this.
- Let's Just See What WOULD Have Happened: In the case of puzzles having more than one answer.
- Progressive Jackpot
- Unexpectedly Obscure Answer: Played straight to the Nth degree. Is it any wonder why these shows are targeted by politicians and governments so often? You could probably do a whole page on them, so here are some notable ones:
- Play TV Canada (which was produced out of Budapest by a company who produces these shows for various broadcasters, including Ireland most infamously) controversially threw several idiotic questions at viewers, as documented in a complaint to the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council:
- The Cats on a Bus puzzle has the hallmarks of a Moon Logic Puzzle: "4 girls are travelling on a bus. Each of them have 3 baskets, in each basket there are 4 cats. Each cat has 3 little kittens. How many legs are in the bus?" note
- Here's another one: "4 girls are travelling on a bus. In each hand they hold 4 baskets, in each basket there are 4 cats. Each cat has 3 little kittens. One cat gets away. How many legs are on the bus?" note
- Now, let's try a skill-testing question Up to Eleven: "9+7-3x0+5-2+4-7+(4+6)x2=?"note
- During the British phone-in scandals, one complaint surfaced involving a show which named "rawlplugs" (a piece of hardware used to anchor a screw into a drywall or plaster wall) and "a balaclava" as items a woman would keep in her handbag. Seriously?
- Five's Quiz Call: "White ______" had "White BlackBerry" and "White Russian Dwarf Hamster" as answers.
Oh, time's up! Here's what was behind the money on the TropeBoard!
- Easier Than Easy/Harder Than Hard: In layman's terms: if the questions are easy, politicians will call it gambling. If the questions are hard, politicians will call it a scam.
- Luck-Based Mission: It feels like one, but we can legally prove that it's not!
- No Budget: Aside from the prizes themselves, these shows tend to be on the cheap end of the scale, production-wise.
- One-Episode Wonder: The Debbie King Show, aired by ITV Play, was a cross between a phone-in quiz and a news programme. Hosted by QuizMania's Debbie King, they still decided to go on with the show, even though ITV had announced earlier that day that the Play channel would be "suspended" (which, in ITV's thesaurus, means "cancelled forever") as part of investigations into their use of premium-rate lines. Whoops.
- Screwed by the Network: The 0898-gate scandals caused just about every single phone-in quiz game in the United Kingdom to be cancelled or put on hiatus.
- Special Effects Failure: Given that they're often No Budget, this is bound to happen. This incident from the aforementioned TBS Midnight Money Madness counts as a minor case of Trash the Set as well.
- And according to YouTube comments, this led to a dim bulb moment after the ensuing commercial; they covered the final answer (Wasting *brain cells*) back up, and the next caller clearly wasn't paying attention.
For our next game, we need you to name parodies of these shows!
- The Scottish comedy Limmy's Show had the recurring sketch "Adventure Call", a phone-in text adventure game hosted by a man named Falconhoof (who may or may not be a parody of Raven). As expected, things go horribly wrong.
- Touch Me, I'm Karen Taylor had a similar sketch known as "Cash Cow". In one episode, the answers to the category "Things you might do" included "Borrow an angle grinder", "See the film Coneheads", and "Oology".
...oh I'm so sorry, the answer we were looking for was "Vest Port
", popular retailer of sweatervests!