One critic has called Queen for a Day “the worst program in television history.” Do you agree or disagree with this assessment? Scheiner argues that the program afforded working-class women the opportunity to appear on television and seek redress for their hardships, albeit in a paternalistic and heavily commercialized setting. What do you think?
March 5, 2019 at 4:51 pm
I personally agree that this is one of the worst shows in television history. To argue against Scheiner’s position that “the program afforded working-class women the opportunity to appear on television and seek redress for their hardships, albeit in a paternalistic and heavily commercialized setting,” I’m not even sure you could consider this show “an opportunity to seek redress for their hardships” with having a condescending male host framing each story in order for the audience to vote on these tragic, poor women. We could guess that the targeted audience was for the middle class, so how much was this show about caring and representing the working class women and how much of it was for entertainment? It also made me think of how reality tv shows/game shows work today, for example American Idol. Yes it gives people the opportunity to become a star who might not have been able to without the show, but we see how they frame/exaggerate life stories and let horrible singers pass to the next round to make sure the show is entertaining. To me, this show is condescending not only in the way the host talks to them and comments on their tragedy (giving the store woman money on the spot as one example), but reinforcing the working class stereotypes of inferior and less educated with the shows goal to “win” being the most “unfortunate” woman in order to be queen for the day. It also showed Kendall’s frame of admiration with the wealthy, showing that because working class women are on this show they need all these new products because they couldn’t afford them, so let us be generous and at least give these new items away just for being here.