A Poke in the "Eye"

The powers-that-be at CBS have been sniffing too much copier toner. Or a competing network put something in the water coolers. Because something is really, really wrong.

First, many CBS affiliates are planning to air a “controversial” update of the 2002 documentary on 9/11 made by two filmmakers who coincidentally were following around a rookie New York firefighter the day the towers fell. During the course of the disaster, some of the rescue workers are – oh, my heavens – swearing. Using, in the words of one rather prissy-sounding FCC censor interviewed on NPR this morning, the “F” word and the “S” word. In this age of thousands and thousands of dollars in fines for a brief flash of a partially naked breast, there is an argument raging whether or not the network should bleep out the profanity, leave it in for the sake of context, or bleep out the profanity and in addition, pixilate the speakers’ mouths so that lip-readers can’t tell what they’re saying. Some of the smaller affiliates have been hinky about even airing the documentary, because they can’t afford the potential fines. Come on now. If several billion tons of concrete were tumbling down around you, would you be watching your language? And more importantly, does anyone get that the real profanity here is not a few stupid words but that a bunch of terrorists flew into the two tallest buildings in Manhattan and killed thousands of people? Anyone?

What the f***? (Original script censored by FCC, and the speaker’s mouth has been pixilated like Richard Hatch’s crotch on “Survivor.”)

And speaking of “Survivor.” This is my second clue that CBS should stand for “the Competition is Beating us to Smithereens so we have to do something drastic."

Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should admit that I’m a johnny-come-lately Survivor fan, since about Season 8 or so. Most reality shows are abominations, but this one, American Idol, and The Amazing Race have caught my attention.

But apparently, Mark Burnett and CBS feel that they have to do anything it takes to attract more attention.

OK, it was kind of cute when they divided up the men against the women. And a little bit more interesting, last season, when they broke up the contestants into four tribes: older men, older women, younger men and younger women. And the dynamic played out about how I figured: the older women, and older men initially, kicked ass because they are smart, strong, and can work together as a team. The younger men flamed out because (no judgment against young men implied, it’s just my observation of what happens when you get a bunch of young guys in a group situation) each one wanted to be Top Dog. The young women flamed out because they similarly were all out for themselves yet still had this need to seek everyone’s approval and advice. It was fascinating to watch it unroll. Ultimately, the top two came down to a young guy (a yoga instructor) and an older guy (a studly fighter pilot) and I’m not sure how the young guy won other than the older guy was a classic Alpha Dog and made a few too enemies along the way.

Now comes this season. Various media outlets, probably fueled by Mark Burnett’s massive ego, have been leaking the latest “twist” the game is planning to use to divvy up the contestants for the upcoming match beginning some time in mid-September. You might have heard about this by now. There will be four “tribes:” one African-American, one Hispanic, one Asian-American, and one white.

As anyone who watches Survivor knows, eventually the tribes are all merged and it’s every man (or woman) for themselves and all bets are off, but is it really necessary to start this way? In a culture already so racially sensitive that riots and public appearances by Al Sharpton can be caused by the dampest of tinder, is this the best way Burnett and (nudge-wink) CBS can come up with to get ratings? OK, I get that after thirteen seasons they want to keep the format from becoming stale, but come on. They’re just inviting trouble.

But perhaps that’s what they want.

Hell, if they want to stir up a little trouble, why not really go for it? Here are the tribal divisions I would really like to see:

1. Shades of the 2000 election! Let’s have four teams composed of democrats, republicans, Ralph Nader and people from Florida, and see who’s left standing at the end. Anyone who appeals the jury’s final choice to the Supreme Court will be disqualified, must grow a beard and go underground for the next three years.
2. Can you say “jihad?” Guarantee more eyeballs for the Eye with a quartet of classic rivals and end the civil war in Iraq at the same time. Shiites against Kurds against Sunnis and Baathists against the US government. No fair using poison gas. Whoever wins the week’s challenge picks one loser who will spend the night in Syria, searching for WMDs. Present a WMD at the next tribal council and you are guaranteed immunity in the next vote, as well as a book deal and an interview with Dan Rather.
3. As long as the game of Survivor is “Lord of the Flies” come to life anyway, let’s go back to the vulnerability of the high school social structure. Teams of jocks against nerds against dope heads against Everyone Else Who Didn’t Fit In Anywhere. Winner gets to star in the next Not Another Teen Movie, where he or she will get what’s coming to them, depending on their original social status, and sleep with Lindsay Loan or Freddy Prinze, Jr, depending on their orientation.
4. My God Can Kick Your God’s Ass – Pit Catholics against Jews against Buddhists against Muslims. Come on, admit you always wanted to see this in action. Winner gets to post their basic rules of life in the courthouse of their choice. Sorry, Unitarians are not allowed. Because competition against other religions isn’t a tenet of their humanistic practices. And if you put them on the jury, they’d never stop talking.