Video "Bums"

[135711]

Another total disgrace, video bums....what do you think? Did they deserve it? Should they get the 6 million in a trust fund?

[Catlady]

I assume you're referring to the people who made the videos entitled "Bum Fights". First of all, even if they were all ready fighting and these guys just came along and taped them, it's still not right. From what I understand though, these guys paid the people in question (I refuse to call them bums) to fight, it's even worse. Contrary to what some people think, the homeless are people too. You'd be surprised how many people who are homeless now, or have been homeless in the past aren't really that different from most of us. As I said on another thread there are some people who are homeless because they have made bad choices, and continue to make bad choices, but many are there due to a string of incredibly bad luck, or because they have been abandoned in some way, whether by their families, the state, or what/whoever.For instance, a person who I fenced with a while back was planning on setting up a public radio station and committed most of their money to doing so. At the last minute, a large company bought their frequency out from underneath them. Because this guy had put most of his money into the project and there would now be no way to get it back, he wound up homeless for a while. So it can happen.

As I said, even if the fight was all ready going on and these guys just taped it. It's still wrong.Granted there's always a debate in communications about taping events. Namely, when do you set down your camera and do something? Or when do you simply stop taping because you are getting too close to violating someone's privacy-- for instance if you were taping a family who has just found out that their child has drowned, it may be news, but is it really right for you to intrude on something that private? Sometimes you can't do anything for the situation anyway, other times you end up doing more of a service by providing a record of the event to prove that such a thing is going on, but neither of those circumstances would be the case here.

I'm sorry for the last lecture bit, but as I mentioned, I'm a grad. student in a communications field--in my case written rather than visual-- and I couldn't stop myself from bring that part of it up.

[Gav]

Is this a wind up? People PAID homeless peole to fight? That's just sick.

[Cyranox11]

Maybe, but not as 'sick as the people who visited the site to watch.

Come on the homeless are poor and disadvantaged yes, but as long as they are adults and of 'normal' mental ability they were willing partners in this. They performed a 'service' and were rewarded for this service, yes we may find it distasteful and maybe even repugnant, but they knew what they were doing and imho it was hardly different to what a pro boxer or similar prize fighter does for his living.

Also, how were the people who paid them different to a pro
boxing promoter? Come on! Go and lock up Don King (again) and every other fight promoter if you are so outraged by this! They exploit people in the same way, sure there maybe more rules in the ring but substantively, it is the same thing...

I don't support what they did, but I dont think it was more wrong than say someone telling Mike Tyson to bite Lennox Lewis' leg in order to increase publicty etc...

Cat Lady you said it, the homeless are people too and as such they have the same rights, duties and responsibilities as anyone else. They are no more the victims than the owners of the website...

Donning asbestos suit (again)!

[Kodiak Kid]

Didn't see it and don't care to. But from what I heard and read about it, it sounds more socially and intellectually stimulating than WWF! (Which I also don't watch so I'll be first to acknowledge I have a marginally informed opinion)

[counter riposte]

They showed a couple of clips of that stuff on the news, and I have to say, that if the public is willing to spend $19.95 per video, to the point of giving these @$$holes 6 Mil, we have one sick public. There has to be somthing said about getting some of this sickness out in the open, the US has a tendency to be a fairly repressed society, which semi values the idea of keeping to thyself. A rather sad thing, considering the state of the world, and our little union here in North America.

To our communications major:
Going back to the history of television, the late 1950's showed incredible restraint in comedic and dramatic performances. You could not even say the word "pregnant" on air. The broadcasters of the day felt that they had a responsibility to the public in showing things that may be morally questionable, and things that would be highly violent for mass media. As the envelope was pushed further and further, and society's restrictions loosened, more and more violent and sexual media appeared. Admittedly, sex and violence sells.

These entreprenurial morons, took the combination of "violence sells" and "reality television" (a growing market), and placed it into video. This stuff still sells, because we actually saw snipits of the stuff throughout local media here in San Diego. Is this responsible journalism? Showing the illegal fights and real violence on television? Question that. These guys made a buck from following America's two great love right now. Violence and reality television. Think about it... they were following the ratings.

And so is the local/national media.

[135711]

everyone feels badly about it, what do we do? I wish I could convince someone to let me run a shelter for homeless, i know i could do it.