TV

The Colony, the new simulated post-disaster reality show airing on the Discovery Channel, aired episode 1 on Tuesday night. Overall, I am intrigued by the premise and the first episode did not suck. For those that don't know me, that's a compliment. First episodes are all preparation and little H, so it is hard to really hook a viewer in episode one. I'll be back around for more when episode 2 airs.

So let me critique it a bit.

First, the setup. The resources available to the cast are quite extensive, even water. Don't get me wrong, this certainly could happen and I know it would be kinda hard to shoot this reality show without peppering the scene with resources, but most disaster survivors will not have access to dozens of batteries, a converter, close-by fresh water, well-stocked first aid kits, sand and charcoal for water filtration, etc, etc. In a post-survival environment, this crew is clearly in a relative Eden.

Second, the worthiness of this 'experiment'. The intro states these people will help us study post-disaster scenarios, but I would argue this is not an empirically-useful experiment. It is sanitized greatly. It has to be to work in this television format (and to keep people from being seriously hurt or to keep them from being very sick). As far as I know, there is no control experiment to mirror this one. There are no tested variables. The initial set of survivors was carefully selected to include a widely divergent set of highly-specialized skills which is incredibly unlikely under any realistic disaster scenario. There is no way to know how much of what these people do is greatly influenced by the people creating the tests. This isn't scientific, and I have a very hard time believing a lot of very useful information will come from it.

Third, this is a reality show. Again, it is controlled and sanitized by producers and the safety and legal teams. The primary goal of the show is entertainment, not realism. That's not a negative so much as it makes it clear that the show is not really attempting to show what is likely, only what is likely given an enormous influence of conditions and decisions made by the producers, writers, directors, and overseers. The participants are much less in control of their actions than in a real disaster scenario. Fear of the unknown here is manufactured with midnight maurader raids and resource shortages, but every participant knows without a doubt they will not be abandoned to die should they fail to procure enough water. That is a serious disconnect from the real situation.

So, some critiques based solely on the first episode. None of these were unexpected, and I'd also argue none of them will terribly impact whether or not I enjoy watching the show. I'm a skeptic, so I question these things by default.

The Colony has potential, but don't take it too seriously as an objective study. It is not one. However, if the show serves to educate people on the difficulties and dangers of post-disaster survival, it has more than justified its existence. I hope the narrative doesn't get bogged down in cast arguments and loud fights. Sure, they will happen (and are a vital component of what happens in reality), but editing can blow these arguments well out of proportion and cause the viewer to focus too much on people yelling and to focus too little on learning how the cast solves very difficult problems collectively.

I may have more on the show after more episodes. At any rate, I'll tune in again for Ep 2 and look forward to exploring more of this scenario.

What would you do in the wake of a global catastrophe? How would you find food? Water? Shelter?

The Colony is a controlled experiment to see exactly what it would take to survive and rebuild under these circumstances. For 10 weeks, a group of 10 volunteers, whose backgrounds and expertise represent a cross-section of modern society, are isolated in an urban environment outside Los Angeles and tasked with creating a livable society.

With no electricity from the grid, no running water and no communication with the outside world, all the volunteers have to work with are their skills and whatever tools and supplies they can scavenge from their surroundings.

Experts from the fields of homeland security, engineering and psychology have helped design the world of The Colony to reflect elements from both real-life disasters and models of what the future could look like after a global viral outbreak.

Over the course of the 10-week experiment, the Colonists must work together to build the necessities of survival, such as a water-filtration system, a battery bank that powered their electricity, a solar cooker, a shower system and a greenhouse – and even some niceties (a coffee maker!).

Tune in Tuesday, July 21, 2009 at 10 p.m. ET/PT to see who thrives and who fails to survive

Roger Ebert has another excellent entry in his journal, this time a scathing critique of irrational bloviator Bill O'Reilly:

Bill O'Reilly has been brought low by the same process that afflicted Jerry Springer. Once respected journalists, they sold their souls for higher ratings, and follow their siren song. Springer is honest about it: "I'm going to Hell for what I do, and I know it," he's likes to say. O'Reilly insists he is dealing only with the truth. When his guests disagree with him, he shouts at them, calls them liars, talks over them, and behaves like a schoolyard bully.

Read the rest here.

News out today that Comedy Central has ordered 26 new episodes of one of my favorite shows, Futurama.

Taking a page from the "Family Guy" resurrection guidebook, the canceled Fox animated comedy is returning with an order from Comedy Central for 26 new episodes to run over two seasons.

"Futurama" creators Matt Groening and David X. Cohen already are working on stories for the new batch of episodes of the sci-fi cartoon, slated to premiere on Comedy Central in mid-2010.

I've been mostly disappointed with the new movies, although they weren't horrible. Certainly weren't up to the standards of the original series. Hopefully the writers will return to some of the great episode concepts, such as The Farnsworth Paradox. Regardless, new Futurama is always a good thing! Everything did just taste purple for a sec.

Leading skeptics Phil Plait and Michael Shermer are among the brilliant cast involved in a new project called The Skeptologists. They are trying to get the show picked up by a television network.

We're not willing to just accept stories of the paranormal or supernatural. We want proof. Each week, we'll take on a handful of wild claims -- from the Bermuda Triangle to Bigfoot sightings to haunted houses -- and apply accepted scientific practices and experiments to see if these ideas really hold up. Whether in the field or in the lab, we'll literally put these subjects to the test in the hopes that one day we may find something that can't be explained. Each episode will investigate one or more popular paranormal, supernatural, or other type of phenomena, in favor of evidence-based science.

They've just finished wrapping up a pilot episode shoot and they anticipate pitching the program very soon. You can help get this show on the air.

We will compile the emails and present to the executives along with our all-star cast, entertaining pilot program and solid production background to seal a great TV deal to give the Skeptics of the world a show they can stand behind, and be proud of! Take a moment, and send a brief email to skeptologists@newrule.com. Your email will be collected and will help support the show.

With all of the ufo hunting, fake mediums, and paranormal 'investigators' on television (not to mention the bazillions of hours of religious programming), we desperately need to get skepticism some airtime. Send in your email to help get this show picked up by a network.