Kapamilya, Deal or No Deal - Criticisms & Controversies

Criticisms & Controversies

  • Philippine Daily Inquirer columnist Nestor U. Torre expressed disappointment on the show because it is not "all that spellbinding and empathetic" since the briefcase a contestant has chosen would keep it to the end (contrary to some versions which exchanging briefcases is allowed). Also, he pointed out that the format of the show limited Aquino's effectivity as a host.
  • In his January 18, 2007 column, Nestor U. Torre expressed that the game show makes it so difficult for its players to win big because it’s based on sheer luck, with a player’s fate being sealed by the choice he makes of a particular briefcase to place his hopes on at the start of the game. He cited that another major factor that reduces players’ winnings is the “greed” motive that pushes contestants to reject already substantial deals from the show’s resident “banker,” because they want to make even more money by pushing the game into the next round. However, Torre does recognize that subsequent contestants were the first to benefit from the game show’s beefed-up top prize and will bring new excitement in everyone involved—the contestants, the studio audience, and the host. He mentioned that the move to double the game’s pot sets the show apart from other game programs, many of which offer a couple of million pesos in potential top winnings. With its P4 million pot for the 2007 run of the first season, he pointed out that it is now the best game show to beat.
  • The July 14, 2006 episode featuring psychic Rene Mariano became controversial when the host complemented Rene's abilities because the latter predicted the end of the career of Hero Angeles, Star Circle Quest grand champion, at Morning Girls with Kris and Korina (previously aired on the same network). Hero and his brother reacted at GMA-7's Startalk saying that the host's remarks were unnecessary and foul.

Read more about this topic:  Kapamilya, Deal Or No Deal

Famous quotes containing the word criticisms:

    I have no concern with any economic criticisms of the communist system; I cannot enquire into whether the abolition of private property is expedient or advantageous. But I am able to recognize that the psychological premises on which the system is based are an untenable illusion. In abolishing private property we deprive the human love of aggression of one of its instruments ... but we have in no way altered the differences in power and influence which are misused by aggressiveness.
    Sigmund Freud (1856–1939)