Posted on 11/09/2009 2:09:50 AM PST by kathsua
ABC has run promos for All My Children (AMC) that are obviously false. Broadcasters receive licenses based on serving the public interest. A network that lies to attract viewers is not acting in the public interest. The FCC should consider revoking ABC's license allowing it to own individual television stations.
I initially thought I wouldn't post this on blogs other than the one at Soap Central because it involves a show with fewer viewers than live in the 33rd most populous state, Arkansas. However, I realized that a network that will lie in promos for one show will likely lie in promos about other shows.
ABC claimed that the program would reveal the "real killer" of the character Stuart Chandler in the May 15 episode. Judging from the shows that have appeared thus far this month, AMC is not going to reveal the real killer.
Instead the head writer of AMC Charles "Chucky" Pratt Jr. has decided to name someone who could not possibly have committed the crime as presented in May. He has in effect rewritten the scene so that three characters who were pointing guns at the victim before the shooting just disappeared.
Viewers probably shouldn't have been surprised at this blatant disception. AMC had promoted the May 15 episode as having a major character being killed. Instead, the victim was a character who had been appearing only infrequently.
David Canary convincingly played both the major character Adam Chandler and his physically identical twin brother Stuart. They were opposites in terms of personality. Adam is a ruthless control freak who is usually seen wearing a coat and tie. Stuart was the "nicest guy in town" who was usually more casually dressed.
The writers initially made it appear that Adam had been killed, but the characters subsequently discovered that Stuart was the victim. Deception within a show is a acceptable dramatic device, but deception to get people to watch is a form of fraud. Producers of a commercial product who used similar advertising might face criminal prosecution.
In the murder scene three people [one (Kendall Slater) outside and two (Zach Slater and David Hayward) inside] are shown pointing guns at the man they believe to be Adam Chandler but actually is his twin brother Stuart wearing his suit coat. The inside lights have been turned off by another character as part of another story line. Exterior lights appear to still be on and there is occasional lightning.
The camera doesn't show the actually shooting, but a hole in a glass terrace door indicates the shot came from outside. The murder weapon is the revolver held outside by Kendall, the mother of Zach's child and occasionally his wife.
In the next episode, Zach fires the murder weapon within the vicinity of a police officer and then surrenders when he realizes he cannot get away with the revolver. Zach then confesses to the murder to the police chief Zach owns the local casino with an occasional implication he could be a possible "relative" of Tony Soprano. Police chief Jessie Hubbard subsequently reveals that fingerprints of both Kendall and Zach are on the murder weapon.
Zach and Kendall wanted to kill Adam because they falsely believed that a faulty heart valve made by Adam's company had caused the death of their infant son. They didn't know a doctor had revived the son after they have left for the Chandler mansion.
After the shooting Kendall is shown fleeing the murder scene with long time friend and occasional lover Ryan Lavery. When they arrive at the hospital to check on Kendall's son, Kendall remarks to Ryan "I need to remember why we did this.[kill the man they believed to be Adam]." Ryan replies, "you didn't kill Adam, Zach did."
Ryan's statement may indicate a conspiracy in which Zach has decided to take the fall for the crime to protect the mother of his child. Both statements indicate knowledge of the crime that they could only have gained by at least witnessing it.
Sometime later Kendall confesses to the murder just before the DA plans to prosecute her. Kendall and Zach subsequently remarried so they could not be compelled to testify against each other.
The recent portrayal of the murder has Adam Chandler standing outside where Kendall was and pointing the gun inside. The writers want us to believe he shoots his twin under the delusion he is shooting himself.
There has been a suggestion that he was shooting at his reflection in the glass terrace door which would have made it impossible for him to have hit his brother who was off to the side and out of that line of fire. The limited lighting inside, from a fireplace, makes it unlikely he would have thought his brother was himself, although someone expecting to see Adam in the room might have falsely assumed the white "mane" of hair meant the man was Adam.
Considering that at least five people were looking for Adam at the time, it is virtually impossible for him to have been in that location without being seen. If he had pointed the gun toward the inside, the two armed men inside would have seen him easily and opened up on him knowing that they could have claimed to have fired in self defense.
If he had committed the crime how would Kendall and Ryan have known about it and how would Zach have obtained the murder weapon? If Adam killed Stuart why weren't his fingerprints on the gun along with Zach's and Kendall's?
AMC has become an Alice in Wonderland type world presided over by its own Mad Hatter, head writer "Chucky" Pratt. The writers are apparently incapable of coming up with a new story line to replace the murder one, so they are artificially perpetuating the Stuart murder story line by changing what happened and deliberately lying by claiming they are now identifying the real killer.
Those of us who remember the murder episode know that the writers are lying about the possibility of Adam Chandler being the "real killer". Unfortunately. those who didn't see it or have forgotten what happened in the murder episode may be deceived by these claims and watch the farce the program has become. We cannot be sure that AMC won't come back in another month or two and claim someone else is the "real killer"
Incidentally. I am continuing to watch the program as an historian who is interested in the decline of network television. If I had been a fan of the show I would have given up on it long ago due in part to the highly repetitive dialogue of some characters.
In the long run successful advertising depends upon the credibility of the advertiser. ABC as an advertiser no longer has any credibility.
A network that lies about what will happen on one show will lie about other shows. It probably isn't illegal for television networks to falsely advertise programs. The only recourse for viewers is to ignore promos by networks that have been known to lie.
I wouldn't watch any ABC program based on an ad on the network. For that matter, I wouldn't attend, rent or buy a new Disney movie based on advertising because I don't believe I can trust ABC Disney to tell the truth.
I wonder how many people realize that the "new" series "V" is actually a remake of an 80's series of the same name. The new series may, or may not, be consistent with that series.
Of course the affiliates might not have to worry.
ABC has been lying in its news broadcasts for decades so why not lie about its programs too.
Goodness sakes. I guess we don’t have many problems in the world that we have to complain about a soap saying “the killer would be revealed” and then pulls a “gotcha ya”. Come one now, we have bigger problems.
May is a long way off, 6 months away. Geeze, get a life.
It’s a soap opera, get a job or a real life.
AMC lost me after they killed off poor Jenny Gardener in a jet ski explosion.
Your title is false advertising. I thought this thread was about something that actually mattered.
Get one while there is still time.
Oh, I think we should start a thread about CBS falsely advertising
that Bobby got killed on Dallas and it turned out to be a dream.
We could discuss that for awhile.
“I think we should start a thread about CBS falsely advertising that Bobby got killed on Dallas and it turned out to be a dream.”
LOL! And what network ran that awful Bob Newhart show FOR YEARS and that turned out to be a dream, and we could have still been watching the old funny Bob Newhart show THAT WHOLE TIME?
Maybe Disney/ABC could have Hannah Montana murder Miley Cyrus.
CBS. Emily was so much better than second wife! I did
love the first Newhart. Still watch the reruns.
It's probably been a decade since I watched All My Children.
That was so sad!! Was on her honeymoon right? I think Kelly Ripa was Adam's neice back when I watched...
You mean Darryl, Darryl and Larry never existed? I wonder how Dr. Newhart interpreted THAT part of his dream?
Um, where is the Sarcasm tag?
Because if you are for real...
It is ENTERTAINMENT!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.