From the MRW Water Cooler
Q: Lately Mike and others have been alluding to the fact that DJ’s is much bigger than just a TV show, and that it will now (or possibly has always) been/be a vehicle for a much larger agendas/goals/themes/whatever. – Arica
Hi Arica, The notion of working for a living is, and has always has been, in my opinion, a large and encompassing theme – larger and more encompassing than a TV show – and something we all share, trust fund babies excluded. Dirty Jobs however, is nothing more than a TV show, driven by a central figure with an evolving point of view. It’s primary purpose is to entertain.
And I suppose that is fine, but I’m going to be very honest and this may make me a simpleton or possibly naive, or maybe just apathetic.
Like anything worthwhile, honesty has it’s price. Go for it.
I don’t, and have never used or viewed DJ’s as a place for me to get anything other than entertainment, pure and simple.
Take heart, for you are in the vast majority, and I am grateful for your support. But tell me, don’t you ever find it entertaining to learn something new? Or consider something from a different point of view? Many people are entertained by such things. Others, limit their definition of entertainment to slapstick and poo jokes. Nothing wrong with either approach, but be careful with the “e” word. It means many things to many people.
I think DJ’s is funny, witty, and entertaining. I don’t ever see myself tuning in on a Monday night for guidance on how I should feel about blue collar vs white collar, or the environment and how it’s not in peril, but we should do “brown” things to save us money…yada, yada, yada.
Relax, no one is going to force you to learn anything. Besides, Dirty Jobs has never offered “guidance” in the areas you mention. Only opinion. And only my own. If you are saying you don’t care to hear my opinion of this or that, point taken. Hell, I’ve been sick of me and my opinions for years now. Unfortunately, my job is to express them from time to time. But don’t suppose for a moment that I’m trying to “guide” you to some new way of thinking. I’m not. I’m only one guy with a show on cable TV, expressing an opinion, no more valid than your own. No Kool Aid will be served.
I have watched and will only watch DJ’s because it often times makes me smile, and because Mike is easy on the eyes, and says funny things, and because the crew is dammed to be adorable.
Thank you sincerely, on behalf of myself and my adorable crew.
If I wanted to be told, or better yet educated, on how I should think or feel about the environment or the job market/economy, I would probably watch the news.
That, in my opinion, is a strategy rooted in counter-intuitivity. (I know, not really a word.)
The fact is the news bores me to tears, and maybe I’m just the typical product of my generation.
Maybe you are. But if it’s any consolation, I don’t watch the news either. It’s a poor way to stay informed.
But I feel like, one man, one show can only do so much.
Well, based on your comments, it doesn’t sound like you’re looking for much else. If Dirty Jobs is an elephant, you seem to be saying that you only want to look at the tusks and the trunk. Fair enough. Those are the most interesting parts. Your point though, suggests that you are not interested in the rest of the animal. Again, that’s cool. But it doesn’t mean the rest of the animal isn’t there. Regardless, my main goal in doing the show is to entertain. Period. What may or may not emanate from being “entertaining,” will be left up to the viewer. Some will look no further than the next joke. Others will. Both are welcome and appreciated.
I realized to some people, I may come off as uneducated on the subject, and I probably am, but I just felt like I needed to say it.
Mission accomplished. That’s why the board is here. Look, I understand that I will pay the price with some viewers for occasionally suggesting that something else may lie beneath the exploding toilets and the artificial vagin@s and the dirty pits and the countless misadventures in animal husbandry. I understand that some people get very uneasy when something they like begins to change and evolve. I also understand that others will get bored – fast – with a show that sits on it’s laurels and offers nothing new. Fundamentally, Dirty Jobs is not going to change in a noticeable way. Brown before Green was a repack, not an episode. There might be others like it, but those are different. But from a PR standpoint, what would you suggest I do? After 200 jobs, how would you suggest I discuss the success of this show moving forward? How should I promote it? How can I position it in the press in a way that people will write about? “Hey everybody, look over here! I’m going into another hole!” The Wall Street Journal just called, and asked for my take on the recently reported “labor shortage,” as compared to the current high unemployment rates. I told the reporter what I thought. Calls like that can be very beneficial to the show, but they don’t come because a reporter thinks I’m amusing when bitten by a snake. They come because they see something in the show that you do not find interesting. Dirty Jobs is a mix of substance and spectacle. Ignoring one or the other is your prerogative. Balancing the two is part of my job.
Mike