|
His opponents viewed him as a masterful manipulator who used lies and subversion to gain an unfair advantage over them. Some critics were appalled at his libertine ways, which included a penchant for nudity. In the end, he confounded them all by narrowly surviving a vote to strip him of the role he clearly coveted.
While political partisans might apply that description to a certain president, this time it was Richard, not Bill, who’s the “Survivor,” taking home a million bucks and a new car as the winner of CBS’s phenomenally popular summer television series.
It’s estimated that the finale drew up to 40 million viewers, making it the most engaging TV drama since the “Who Shot J.R.?” episode of “Dallas” two decades ago.
The show’s popularity has provided raw — in more ways than one — fodder for trend-watchers and media critics. Some psychologists have suggested the viewership reveals an unhealthy voyeurism among people who tuned in for the same reason that they slow to stare at a car wreck. Others saw a more benign — or even cathartic — reflection of the dog-eat-dog competitiveness that permeates the working world today. (And you thought it was simply boob-tube entertainment designed to boost ratings and make money for CBS).
But here’s the most intriguing question: How the heck did they manage to keep the winner’s name a secret? That someone can actually preserve secrecy in our era of pilfered nuclear data, prosecutorial leaks and Linda Tripp lips is a phenomenon that begs special study (if not a special investigator).
How, with a ravenous media pack dying to spill the beans, did producers keep Richard under wraps for more than three months?
Inquiring minds want to know. Bill probably does, too.
|
Today's News