Quiz show scandals

The American quiz show scandals of the 1950s were the result of the revelation that contestants of several popular television quiz shows were secretly given assistance by the producers to arrange the outcome of a supposedly fair competition.

Background to the scandals

In the 1950s, television burst into the mainstream. While at the beginning of the decade only 9% of U.S. households had a television, over half had one by 1954, and 86% had them by the end of the decade. The medium proved to be a powerful influence on American society.

Over the same period, the United States was engaged in a technology race with the Soviet Union, as a component of the Cold War. American military and political dominance was bolstered by the nation's technologies that harnessed the power of the atom. This focus on technological superiority contributed to a national reverence of intelligence and knowledge.

It was against this backdrop that quiz shows became popular. Questions asked on these shows required substantial knowledge across a broad spectrum of cerebral topics. The spectacle of people achieving huge financial success through the exercise of brain power was riveting to a nation that revered intellectualism as well as wealth.

Prizes grow

The 1954 Supreme Court ruling in "Federal Communications Commission v. American Broadcasting Co., Inc." [http://www.justia.us/us/347/284/case.html 347 U.S. 284] , that quiz shows were not a form of gambling paved the way for their introduction to television. The prizes of these new shows were astonishing in magnitude, and gave them an aura of significance that went well beyond mere entertainment. "The $64,000 Question"'s predecessor radio show was "The $64 Question", and few prizes exceeded even $100. There was no gradual escalation; "The $64,000 Question" debuted on June 7, 1955, with a top prize 1,000 times the predesessor. ($64,000 in 1955 is equivalent to approximately $491,000 in 2007 [http://www.aier.org/research/col.php] .)

The scandals

ponsor interference leads to outcome rigging

In the 1950s, it was common practice for game shows and other shows to be sponsored solely by one company, even to the extent of having the company's name in the title of the show. Examples included Geritol's "Twenty-One."

It was empirically determined by show sponsors and the networks that influencing the outcome of a game show could increase the dramatic value, and therefore its attraction to viewers. More viewers naturally increased the advertising exposure a sponsor company would receive.

Outcome influence came in many forms, some relatively benign. For example, contestants would be given stage directions on how to act while on camera. On "The $64,000 Question", contestants were placed in an "isolation booth" when answering questions, the premise presumably to prevent them from receiving any help from the audience. To heighten the drama, the ventilating fans in the isolation booth were turned off after the question was asked. Under the hot stage lights, the temperature rose quickly, causing the contestant to sweat visibly. This would lead contestants to mop their brows before answering the question.

Other forms of influence were less benign. More popular contestants would be asked questions within their areas of expertise, or even provided the answers to upcoming questions. Less popular contestants would be given more difficult questions in areas outside their expected knowledge.

The story is revealed

Herb Stempel's scripted loss to the more-popular Charles Van Doren occurred on December 5, 1956, and involved his deliberately getting the answer to a question about an Academy Award-winning movie wrong. (The correct answer was "Marty," one of Stempel's favorite movies.) After his scripted loss, Stempel blew the whistle on the operation. Initially, he was dismissed as a sore loser, and not till August 1958 was his credibility bolstered. Ed Hilgemeyer, a contestant on "Dotto," announced that he had found a notebook containing the very answers contestant Marie Winn was delivering on stage. But the final stroke came from "Twenty-One" contestant James Snodgrass, who had sent registered letters to himself containing the advance answers. Such evidence was irrefutable.

By October, the story was everywhere, and the quiz shows' Nielsen ratings were dropping. The networks denied everything and canceled the now-suspicious shows. Meanwhile, New York prosecutor Joseph Stone convened a grand jury to investigate the charges. Many of the coached contestants, who had become celebrities due to their quiz-show success, were so afraid of the social repercussions that they were unwilling to confess to having been coached, even to the point of perjuring themselves to avoid backlash. The judge sealed the grand jury report.

The 86th Congress, by then in its first session, quickly saw the political opportunity the scandals offered; in October, 1959, the House Committee on Legislative Oversight, under Representative Oren Harris's chairmanship, began to hold hearings investigating the scandal. Anna Marie "Patty" Duke, then a child actress, testified to having been coached, as did Stempel, Snodgrass, and Hilgemeyer. But the bombshell dropped on November 2 when Van Doren said to the Committee, "I was involved, deeply involved, in a deception. The fact that I too was very much deceived cannot keep me from being the principal victim of that deception, because I was its principal symbol."

Aftermath of the scandals

Law and politics

The entire matter was called "a terrible thing to do to the American people" by President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

External sources

* [http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/patc/quizshow/index.html NPR Article on Radio Quiz Shows]
* [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/quizshow/peopleevents/pande05.html PBS Article on Radio Quiz Shows]

ee also

* College Bowl
* Quizbowl
* Charles Ingram
* 2007 British television phone-in scandal