I forgot why I don't watch shows like "Access Hollywood," "Inside Edition," or other shows that cover the entertainment industry until a few days ago.
The fiancee and I were flipping through the channels, and we landed on "Inside Editon's" piece on Minka Kelly being named Esquire's Sexiest Woman Alive.
(For those who don't know, Minka Kelly was in the last scene of "(500) Days of Summer." Before that, she starred on TV's "Friday Night Lights." She's dating Derek Jeter. She's very attractive, so this annoucement was not shocking or newsworthy except that she's not a household name. Then again, it's not like the head cashier at the local Safeway won.)
As you might have guessed, it wasn't an exhaustively researched segment, but what was so obnoxious was that it consisted only of photos and a narrator describing the photos. For example:
"In this shot, Kelly writhes on a satin sheets wearing black lingerie..."
Really? That's what you're offering me. Granted, I don't think anyone watches these shows for ferocious reporting, but can't the writers do more than describe what everyone can see? The photos spell everything out: Yes, she's in black lingerie. She's on a bed.
This leads me to three conclusions:
1.) "Inside Editon's" producers are real sticklers for accuracy and confirmation. I can imagine some hardened Lou Grant type bellowing to a frightened staff: "ET and Extra may beat us on the ratings, but damn it, I'm not losing the facts race. I want IE to be the entertainment show of record, that gets things right the first time!"
2.) Much research was conducted and one of "Inside Edition's" key demographics are blind masturbators and trapped coal miners who can pick up audio.
3.) The writers didn't know who the hell Minka Kelly was and just wrote about the pretty photos.
So, yeah, I won't be watching entertainment news shows anytime soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment