@gkhan
This is not to pose an argument but, to respond, its good that youre thinking outside the box, thinking na thats a talk show, so whatever discussions, may it be nonsense or whatever, the main objective of the talk show is to get high ratings. true, but let me point out some things here.
In the first place, may naniniwala pa ba kay Aling Akino (kris aquino)? Anyboy who heard her condescending (arrogant) words (eg. to the effect na three years pa ang brother ko - sa pagiging presidente ng pilipinas (pnoy)) against Mr. James, would have known how infantile and puerile (immature and childish) that girl sounds and acts. - definitely agree. pero malay mo meron parin naniniwala sa kanya (depende sa viewpoint ng tao if they understand her side of being the mother or being the parent) kasi nasabi nya lang un out of anger. ang tanong, meron din ba naniniwala kay james?
Secondly, its a "talk show" so it is only normal for those people to concoct tales to get ratings, never mind if the topic is absurd or pure lies. - true! But all talk shows or even TV segments has its own ethical standards or policies to follow, Not only about the policy of what (topic) should be discussed, the relevance of the issue, and / or the moral effects to those who are listening. The tv station has its own responsibility of shaping our culture and moral aspects. Therefore, hindi lang ung topic ang subject dito, the interviewer must show full responsibility towards professional and ethical actions. kasi the interviewer could change the objective of the topic being discussed, she / he could actually divert their actual objectives, her credibility could stain the topic being discussed if its biased or not; she could even change the topic for personal gains, and could destroy, nor even protect the image of the interviewee. Malaki ang part ng interviewer of changing the facts and objective of the show, that eventually would lead to changing our culture.
Hence, on the business side of the industry, you are right that they are after for ratings. But on the deeper aspect of this business, they intend to educate, inform, and change our culture.
Third, assuming for the sake of argument that the interviewee exhibited whorish behavior, that is entirely expected from beauty contestants. - true!
Personally, I do not even believe that she got that first runner up placing entirely because of merits. Due to a public perception that Mr. Donald is famous and rich, most girls especially vying for recognition and prize money would do anything to please the guy knowing that he owns the franchise for that contest. - true!
So what's the big fuzz? - werent you amazed that a lot of people here reacted on this thread? There are no fuss / objections / nor commotions here. I / we just hate the mere fact that ethical standards werent established here, especially ung situation ng guy. and the guy wasnt also given the chance to prove, explain, nor defend himself. The guy was caught unarmed, making himself a fool in front of national tv.
whats the Big fuss? there are no objections here but the moral lesson here (i think) is that you (interviewer / interviewee) are expected to act, talk, and think - not just at best, but professionally. We wouldnt react this way if we feel or see something wrong sa segment na to. If you think na janine's decision or way of action in front of national tv is justifiable, well, pano na pag napanood ng anak ko to, and ginaya nya si janine?
And its also good to discuss things, especially criticize people and actions. we stand on a different viewpoints. Kaya nga meron tayong anakbayan and other parties who criticize senators and other government. this is just like the positive versus the negative. its good to clash because if the negative clashes with the positive, it will create a spark. and that spark is what we call "CHANGE"...
sabi nga ni ted failon, May pakialam ka! hahaha..
Cheers gkhan!
http://nuboii.blogspot.com