What can I say - there are some reality shows that I absolutely love. Supernanny, Dog Whisperer, House Hunters, American Idol... I almost can't watch fictional tv mini-series' anymore. They're just not as interesting to me. Recently, I saw Oprah's latest venture:
Oprah's Big Give. Ten people who are given the challenge of giving the most (money) to a stranger in need. The "givers" are chosen ahead of time, the "givees" are chosen ahead of time, so the only variable here is what array of resources the Givers can pull from when preparing for their "big give". The contestants range from a young dot.com millionaire, to a miss usa finalist, to a typical middle-aged man and woman.
As soon as the show starts, it becomes clear that the stakes aren't exactly fair. Some of the contestants have years and years of experience at volunteering, soliciting donations, making and giving formal presentations, etc. But does this experience mean they are inherently the "biggest/ best" giver? I mean, many of us would enjoy being able to pay it forward, and provide someone with the things they need most in order to survive. But what if I don't have the resources to do that? What if I've never had experience polling large corporations for charity money? Right off the bat, I will be at a loss. Apparently, it's not enough to hand someone a warm coat for the winter.
By the end of the first show, it was clear that the judges criticized those who didn't raise more than $50k, and applauded those who raised more than that (I don't know
what I could do to raise that kind of money). Inevitably, the first person voted off was a 30-something woman from NY, with no experience in these skills, but not necessarily less motivation or heart. Shows like
Oprah's Big Give make me wonder, what type of person will the winner be? It's too bad, because this show makes it very apparent that what really matters to the judges, Oprah and "America" is who wins, not who has made the most progress.
