Why Is Almost Every Show Based On A "competition"?

Ive noticed a trend in british tv over the last few years.Every show is based on a competition!Everything from baking,cooking,gardening,survival trials and everything else in between!I dont know about everyone else,but I tend to watch tv (and not alot I might add)to switch off?I think its gone too far now and become boring.I'm bored with watching people being judged and booted off!
What do you think?Do you enjoy competitive shows?Or steer clear?

 

Television is a thing of beauty.

It also comes with an off-button.

 

I hate television. When it's on it is usually tuned to The Science Channel, everything else is crap.

 

I don't own a TV, but TV or elsewhere competition is one of humanity's flaws....

 

The ones that really annoy me are all the antique shows. I only ever see them when I'm out visiting, and I have to say they are IMO largely a put up job. It's obvious that sales have been agreed in advance of the filming, as nobody ever tells one of those 'experts' that what they're trying to peddle to them is a piece of junk, which more often than not it is.

 

I enjoy or can see why there's a competition element in some shows, and don't see the point in others (some of those antique shows are a great example).

There's no need to jump to extreme conclusions though, like uh oh there's a competetion element in most tv shows, tv must suck! I don't care if others really think tv sucks ass, but let it be known it is a subjective conclusion, based on your own personal preferences. Besides there really are other tv programs too. In short I agree with TheGhost:

If you getting overly annoyed by certain tv shows maybe you should be more selective or just watch less alltogether.

 

Competition is nothing but a flaw? Seems too rigid. Not sure if you ment it like that....? Competition clearly has its purposes. Not saying it should rule everything

 

Like I said I only see those shows if I'm at someone else's place. I think the antique shows are a cheap way to fill up day time TV mainly. Probably that's true of most of the 'competition' type stuff esp cooking.

I do watch other stuff on catchup (don't have a TV as I don't want to pay nearly £150 per year for a license) - some drama, some documentaries. It's not the medium but the content of which I'm critical. And the UK license fee :bobby: Got fined £200 one time because they caught me without one.

 

The thing with antique shows is some of them are clearly more fun and interesting when there's no competition element at all. I enjoy certain tv programs about antique stuff. There's more room for intriguing info without a competitive element. I also can see if it is implemented really well or revolves around a clever game with a competitive element it can still be fun for the people who are actually into it. You, me and/or OP should be aware and accept tv is not made for us alone

It's not like I am criticizing anyone that complains about something that they watched on tv. Discussing the things you don't like and the motives behind it can have their purpose. It's just that some people who shit on tv as a whole because of a certain kind of program are most likely overly focussing on that kind of program, or aspect. I mean don't get me started on all those talentshows. Am i declaring all fans sheep or something else? Nope, pointless and always a generalisation anyway.

 

No doubt the antique shows serve to fill up time for old folks etc who watch daytime TV, and I'm not so mean that I'd take away their amusement. One thing I have noticed though is that sometimes the historical knowledge of the 'experts' seems to be somewhat deficient. Does that matter? Probably not as the aim is not to inform people but to entertain them.

Let's NOT talk about talent shows..................

 

Yes, it matters. Nobody benefits from incorrect info, even when it's 'just' entertainment. And the viewers are probably thinking that besides it being entertaining they are learning some fun facts as well (I know I do when I watch some antique show My fav one doesn't have a competition element, and even if it had I still expect the 'experts' to inform us properly)

 

In principle you're probably right - but I wonder how much of the information they get from such shows the average viewer retains beyond about the 5 minute mark - some would, but most probably not. A lot of viewers are probably more interested in the value of objects sold, as they may have something of their own they would like to sell.
So although I don't think it really matters that much, it would be better if they got the basic facts correct -like the century in which the agrarian revolution happened which was recently said to be the 17th by a certain presenter. OK, he's only 100 years out, but it's such basic information that you might expect they would get right.

Thing is, to get to be an antiques expert, maybe you don't have to have a lot of historical knowledge, just to be good at selling stuff and recognizing real antiques - but the BBC surely have a research team working on the show. You might think they'd ensure that information is correct.

 

Both aspects are important to be an antique expert. I don't see how one could be a good one without having a lot of historical knowledge, at least in one specific field (usually regarding their focus on a particular kind of antique).

I definitely expect that from my fav dutch show, and yes, now that I think of it also from the fricking BBC.

 

I actually enjoy a lot of the competition shows, but only the ones that allow a person to showcase their talents. I can't stand the lame voyeuristic shows like Survivor or Big Brother and Bachelor or similar low IQ crap.
My faves are MasterChef (except the UK version-booorrring), Hell's Kitchen, Top Chef, Baking Championship (UK and Australia), Cutthroat Kitchen (hilarious), and a few other cooking ones.
For art I like Ink Master, Top Ink, Face Off, Skin Wars, Forged in Fire, The Great Pottery Throw Down (pleasantly surprised how engrossing that one was) and a few others, Chopped, Man vs Child.

But on a side note out of them all the competition shows around, the one that has the best prize for the winner is hands down Hell's Kitchen.

 

Let me guess: they win a one way ticket to...

 

Yet there's the example I gave.
I actually worked for an antique dealer many years ago. He mainly exported antiques from the UK to the US and Canada. I wouldn't say he had a deep knowledge of history - just enough to ply his trade. Mainly the stuff he dealt with was 18th c. or later, and he knew lots about furniture makers, potters and so on from that period. To what extent he knew other stuff I can't say, but probably only in outline. Profitable business though.

 

I haven't heard of Baking Championship.

I like The Great British Bake Off. It's fun and lighthearted, I think.
Plus they separate the three baking challenges with little segments/reportages (lol help me, what English word am I looking for here??) about the history and the origin of certain foods and/or recipes...a lil bit of gastronomy history.

 

I find that the antique shows on Oregon Public TV to be very informative and the different experts are solid in their knowledge. Shows with contestants are much cheaper to make
because the "performers" are not paid. I dislike the ones you named,NG, but I did like that show where Ramsey tried to turn restaurants into winners.

 

No, they win a position as head chef of a top level restaurant with a starting salary of $250,000. If the person isn't an idiot, that is a prize that will provide lifelong benefits.
not too shabby of a prize.
I always am amazed at the "contestants" who don't realize the show is a job interview and act as if they were on Big Brother or something.....LOL

 

yeah that the name of it.
In America they have a baking championship show that is very similar. They have spring, winter and fall ones if I'm not mistaken.
I also like the silly cake baking competition shows, ya know 27 minutes to make a fifteen tier layer cake that looks like the empire state building kind stuff.