PAUL:	The surveys are back, the 
	“people meters” read, and the 
	focus groups shown the door.   
	
	After collating the whole 
	mess, the mainframe is down.  
	The results of the fall sweeps 
	are back, we’ll soon know our 
	Newfoundland and Icelandic 
	ratings.  
	
	Here to break the news and 
	interpret, or “spin”, the 
	information is Andre Lander,  
	Chief Rotologist ... really?

ANDRE:	Yes, I’m a Rotologist.

PAUL:	Chief Rotologist and Senior 
	Vice President of Imagonics.  
	First, lets get the numbers 
	out of the way.

ANDRE:	Right away ?

PAUL:	Honestly, Mr. Lander, I’m in 
	such suspense I doubt I’ll be 
	able to concentrate on 
	anything until I know.
	
ANDRE:	You’re a brave man, doing this 
	live on air.

PAUL:	We’ve put a lot into this 
	show.  We’ve worked tirelessly 
	to give the audience what they 
	want.  And during sweeps week 
	this station offered only the 
	most titilating, salacious and 
	exploitive programming. I’m a 
	confident man.

ANDRE:	Well, your numbers are down.

PAUL:	WHAT!  That can’t be right!  
	There must be a problem with 
	the survey methodology.
	
ANDRE:	That’s only the quantitative 
	indicators.  There are 
	qualitative responses as well.
	
PAUL:	Ya, try to cheer me up, why 
	don’t you.  It’s 1997, Lander!  
	Quality is meaningless. 
	(pause) Anyway, these 
	indicators are ...?

ANDRE:	Discouraging.

PAUL:	Ahhh ...

ANDRE:	People that liked the show 
	liked it less than before.  
	People that originally 
	disliked the show continue to 
	dislike it with some groups 
	disliking it much more.
	
PAUL:	Some gains then?

ANDRE:	I suppose.

SFX:	PAUL VIOLENTLY SNATCHES PAPER

PAUL:	And “people.”  Who are 
	“people” anyway ?  Shag them.
	
	What is this, “The Lander 
	Loathing Scale”?  What is 
	this, Factor 83/90?

ANDRE:	Eighty-three percent of the 
	people that disliked the 
	program profoundly disliked 
	it, scoring 90 on the loathing 
	scale.

PAUL:	You know something, I’ve 
	decided not to believe any of 
	this.  We have good numbers in 
	Canada.

ANDRE:	That’s a different matter.  
	It’s hardly as competitive a 
	market.  And I’m afraid that 
	numbers aside, this 
	corresponds to anecdotal 
	evidence.  People like the 
	show less.
	
PAUL:	Why?

ANDRE:	In a word - you.

PAUL:	Me?

ANDRE:	Let’s listen to some tape from 
	the focus group.
	
SFX:	CROSS FADE TO SMALL ROOM

ANDRE:	Okay, so, Number 6, what is it 
	that really bugs you about 
	Paul?

ALEX:	First, the sound of his voice. 
	It just goes through me like, 
	I don’t know, like dental 
	work.  And you know, as a 
	taxpayer, I can’t get past the 
	fact that I’m paying this 
	guy’s salary.

WOMAN:	Yeah, I can’t listen to him 
	either, when I think about 
	that.
	
WOMAN2:	I used to find him ... I don’t 
	know ... sexy.

WOMAN:	Yeah, now he seems ... is it 
	older?

ANDRE:	You despise him, don’t you.

WOMAN2:	I wouldn’t go that far.

ANDRE:	Come on, admit it!

ALEX:	It’s true, admit it.

ALL:	GRUMBLE.

WOMAN2:	Okay, I despise him.

ANDRE:	Thank you for sharing.   
	Number 19, what is it?

19:	I quite like the show, and I 
	like Paul.

ANDRE:	What, like a homosexual 
	attraction?

19:	NO!  I find the show 
	informative and entertaining, 
	and Paul an engaging host.
	
SFX:	BACK TO STUDIO

PAUL:	God bless that man!  Who is 
	he?  I’m buying him a cup of 
	coffee.

ANDRE:	The people in the focus group 
	are guaranteed anonymity.  We 
	find it essential if 
	participants are to be 
	perfectly candid.  Anonymity 
	affords them a freedom to 
	hate. ... I can tell you that 
	Number 19 was ... 

SFX:	PAPERS BEING CONSULTED

ANDRE:	... oh look he’s on parole, 
	for ? ... mail fraud.  That’s 
	right he was a confidence man.  
	But then that’s not 
	surprising.  Criminals are one 
	of the groups that have 
	consistantly enjoyed the show.
	
PAUL:	Who else?

ANDRE:	Let’s see ... unskilled 
	agricultural workers; 
	untenured academics - 
	particular fondness for the 
	program in the sub-set of 
	academics identified as having 
	little prospect of career 
	advancement, persons in hair 
	...

PAUL:	Hair?

ANDRE:	Yes, barbers, beauticians, 
	etc.

PAUL:	It is so weird, hey, pockets 
	of people who like the show 
	and others that don’t.  I know 
	the segment of the show 
	carried in Canada is very 
	popular in Edmonton, Alberta, 
	for instance. But if I showed 
	up on the Gulf Islands in B.C. 
	... well, I’ve received death 
	threats.

ANDRE:	That’s too bad, Edmonton - 
	yesterday.  Gulf Islands - 
	they’re tomorrow.
	
PAUL:	Where’s today?

ANDRE:	It’s irrelevant.  We need to 
	know where we’ve been and 
	where we’re headed.
	
PAUL:	What about where we are?

ANDRE:	Who cares.

PAUL:	I guess.  Now, Andre, your 
	company doesn’t just rate 
	shows, you offer a consulting 
	service that will help make us 
	more popular.

ANDRE:	I do.  Content is your game, 
	perception is ours.

PAUL:	So the actual content of this 
	program is not at issue.

ANDRE:	No.  What we are proposing is 
	a complete renovation of your 
	image.  Over the next few 
	weeks my people will generate 
	several models for a new you, 
	by the middle of February 
	we’ll have a final make-over 
	in place.

PAUL:	Hey, why not.  I’ve tried 
	everything else.  I’m easy to 
	get along with. 
	
	Say, if you, the listener, 
	have any proposals about how 
	or what I should change, by 
	all means, write us, we’d be 
	happy to hear from you.  I’m 
	not really bound up in who I 
	am, I got over that particular 
	hurdle years ago.  (s.v.) What 
	a relief that was.
	
	Thanks for coming in, Andre 
	Lander, makeover maestro 
	supreme, and vice-president of 
	Imagonics.

Page 9 of 9	THE RATINGS EXPLAINED