Survivor

[Soli]

http://graphics10.nytimes.com/images/2006/08/24/business/24survivor.600.gif
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/24/business/media/24survivor.html?ex=1172116800&en=7fc118cff7de95f3&ei=5087&excamp=GGBUsurvivor

I watch Survivor a lot, but don't know what to think about this season. :watson: It''ll be interesting at least!

[Jetsetlemming]

The way they're lined up in the picture reminds me of a high school year book shot of one of the afterschool clubs. :rofl:

[MNJetter]

Both CBS and Mr. Burnett acknowledged that the new format could be criticized. “I know it’s going to be controversial,” he said. “I’m not an idiot.”

At least Mr. Burnett is willing to speak frankly to whoever prompted him to say that, and not spew out some political nonsense. This way, only time and ratings will tell if it works or not.

[Stephy]

I don't like this show too much. If it is "real", then the pressure, pain, and suffering they go through is not something I find entertaining and nice to watch. Also this should be in the Entertainment section.

[Soli]

^ I don't like the show really, but my whole family watches it and it's fun. We all watch together and sometimes buy special treats to eat while we watch it like ice cream. :)

But these people know what they're getting into when they sign up, I guess. I'm sure they warn them of what they'll be doing.

And I could put it in the entertainment section, but not as many people go in there. Besides, I put this here more because of the racial issue rather then if people are planning to watch it.

[PopCulturePooka]

I think this is an awesome idea myself.

[Angelyne]

The only thing that pisses me off about this cheap ratings grab is that they package races into four neat groups based completely on skin color. What about those who don't fit into any those four categories? What about Arabs? Indians? Native Americans? If Survivor was really trying to make a statement like they claim they are, then they would try to include everyone.

:rolleyes:

[Shuft]

The only thing that pisses me off about this cheap ratings grab is that they package races into four neat groups based completely on skin color. What about those who don't fit into any those four categories? What about Arabs? Indians? Native Americans? If Survivor was really trying to make a statement like they claim they are, then they would try to include everyone.

:rolleyes:
I think if you asked the average Amerian to name the 4 biggest racial groups in the US (since this is primarily aimed at a US audience), they would say white, black, latino, and asian. If it was all about color, they would throw a few arabs in with the latinos (this would be a great idea for a racially insensative "odd-couple" show BTW).

I hope whoever came up with it gets a promotion, because they just got NBC a ton of free advertising.

[Ichisan]

They look like 2 white groups in the photo to me. Except for the woman on the top left none of them look Latino.

[Plekto]

Horribly, blatantly racist. As expected in today's America.

And yes, "white" is a minority now in the U.S.

[Josh]

They are so going to take a lot of flak. Nobody is denying that. To be honest, I have never watched survivor before and now im going to.

Gotta give 'em points because you know the first couple episodes, at least, are going to have much higher ratings and thats what its all about.

[Plekto]

The apalling thing is how they start off as "tribes". It's going to get ugly, fast.

[Roxie]

They look like 2 white groups in the photo to me. Except for the woman on the top left none of them look Latino.
hahaha, first thing that came to my mind, but I know it's not the case And yes, "white" is a minority now in the U.S. Who lied to you?

"White/Caucasian" is still, by far, the majority.
According to the 2000 census whites make up 75.1% of the population and white, non hispanic are 67.4%

[Plekto]

Not here in California, they don't. We have way more hispanic that any other type of ethnicity here.

[Shuft]

My guess for the next survivor

tribe 1: straight men
tribe 2: straight women
tribe 3: gay men
tribe 4: gay women


Also I really hope there's an old white guy who doesn't think he is racist, but totally is. That could be some solid entertainment. I have no problem with socially irresponsible television as long as it cures my boredom.

[Roxie]

Not here in California, they don't. We have way more hispanic that any other type of ethnicity here.

Again, not true. According to the 2000 census, whites account for 77.2% of the Californian population.

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html

[Jetsetlemming]

I never get why people get ideas like that. O_o Really, at least before you say it out loud you should verify it like Roxie did for you. :rofl: I remember people from the trailer park I lived in in middle/high school saying the same shit.

[Plekto]

Again, not true. According to the 2000 census, whites account for 77.2% of the Californian population.

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html
__________________
****
Actually, they are including them in that figure. It officially says 45.5%, but the reality is that in 2000, 20% of California was either the underage children of immigrants or illegal immigrants. Estimates for the entire U.S. are that there are 15-20 million people who are illegals from all over the world and weren't counted last time. In the last five years it's changed dramatically in California. In 2010, it will definately show a massive change.

[Jetsetlemming]

Look, even if it really is 45.5%, unless some other group in Cali is larger than 45.5% of the population (which would leave just about no percentage of the whole left for any other race), then whites are still the racial majority, as there are more of them than any other group. The only difference is wether they're more than the other races combined in Roxie's figure, or just the biggest in yours, it's still the majority.

[Roxie]

The census still shows that white, non-hispanics (which, let me remind you, you're weren't that specific in the first statement. when talking about white or white, non-hispanic, one must always be specific!), are more numerous than those identified as hispanic.

The next census will undoubtedly show a big change, but until then, this is what we got.

[Plekto]

I'm talking about now, though. It's almost seven years since the last census, and all data that we have is pointing to a change in California(though it isn't surprizing in the least. Fox basically did everything he could to promote the idea of leaving Mexico and coming to the U.S. to the poor.

[Angelyne]

Social researchers have been bitching for years that the U.S. Census uses some poor methods of obtaining demographics. There are a number of reasons why, but most pertinent to this thread is that the census often fails to account for illegal immigrants, people without a fixed address (e.g. homeless), and criminals who just don't want to be found. Lesser problems are people who falsify info on the mail-in portion of the census, and to a certain extent, people who work and travel outside the country for extended periods of time are sometimes unaccounted for in the census.

The census is not completely unreliable, but it gives a skewed picture of the minority situation in America. There are generally more minorities in this country than the census indicates.