One thing that must be addressed is the obvious aspect of all this - it is a TV show. That means editing is taking place for the purpose of story telling.
What do I do with this information? Because someone like me and the podcasters I have listened to have broken down the typical format that these editors use to be able to generally tell which person will be winning the show and which one will be out that episode, etc.
Also, since a 40 minute episode actually took place over the course of 3 days I have to approach it as cannon. That means I am not using exit interviews generally for my interpretation of what a person should or should not have been doing in that situation since those episodes took place months later. Unless it is a public "secret scene" or was on the show, I cannot just assume. I am taking the show for its face value and trying to break it down from that. This will inherently produce some flaws but it is also how I can manage to be my most objective as opposed to favoring contestants who I liked better or avoid criticizing players I simply did not like because of their personality.
I am also trying to avoid "edgic" or breaking down the edit in terms of airtime and story arc to see will win in any given season. This is supposed to be an unbiased research but obviously since winners are more likely to receive screen time (generally), than there will inherently be more of their game play to go off of than the person that was eliminated second in any given season. However, both can be very beneficial in this process.
No comments:
Post a Comment