ORIGINAL: quiksilver
BG - I'm just wondering why more companies/producers don't go out of their way to track down the world's foremost hunting experts and work with THEM to put out a quality television product.
Wouldn't it behoove them to actually have some actual credibility behind their marketing dollars?...as opposed to promoting someone like Vicki Cianciarulo, who probably wouldn't even go hunting ifsome poor intern wasn'tschlepping around the woods, lugging her treestand and dragging her giantdeer out.Brutal honesty.
Under Armour wouldn't blow a wad of advertising dollars on Hannah Montana. She's popular. She's an advertising cashcow - but it just doesn't make sense. Why not use a guy like Tiger Woods or Alex Ovechkin? An elite athlete.
I just don't understand why elite hunters are treated differently. Just makes no sense to me.
don't watch them then. a lot of people who have lots of knowledge to offer don't get put on screen because they don't work well there. Maybe they freeze up on camera, speak poorly or sound dumb even when making a good point, can't take direction or think in viewability terms, or are just plain ugly. things like this make for very bad television, and get flipped right past by a casual viewer. on the other hand, someone who looks good and works well on camera, will be more likely to make a viewer stop to watch. a person who may not be all that interested in hunting is more likely to stop to watch a good tv personality than a bad one, and devout hunters appear to watch them too, even if they may not be the most authentically great hunters in the world. In other words, Lee and Tiffany (and other tv hunters) look good, are good on camera, and are at least good enough hunters to draw viewers, and that's what gets people on tv. I also have little doubt that tv hunters log a lot of hours in the woods and likely do the best they can to improve their skills overall, even if they need some help from their crew.