WTF?

[bladespark]

So I was expressing my dislike of the TV show CSI to somebody in a casual conversation. This dislike is based mostly on the harm CSI has done to my personal reputation, as it means I have, on a few occasions, had to explain to somebody that NO fursuits are not for sex, and NO my career is not about being a nasty pervert.

She responds that she loves the show, because it promotes fighting crime!

I am a bit startled by this, and respond that no, it's about sensationalism and getting viewers to watch, not about fighting crime.

And she says that they're all about accuracy, why they talked to REAL FURRIES before doing that episode, and got the approval of REAL FURRIES for the script!

So... because somewhere there's at least one real furry that thinks that portrayal is accurate, this means CSI is dedicated to accuracy?

NO. CSI is a TV show. It is dedicated to getting viewers to watch it, thus it is dedicated to sensationalism. End of story. It is not trying to raise awareness of crime fighting. It is trying to get people to watch TV and the commercials that come with. If they were interested in accuracy, the show would tank horribly, because most of the exciting bits where they deal directly with criminals would never happen. Because CSI people DO NOT interview suspects, or chase them down or any of that. They examine and analyze crime scene evidence, and that is ALL they do. End of story. Fin. There is no possible argument here.

But I'm making bets that she's going to reply and argue anyhow.

Comments

[beetlecat.livejournal.com]

I quote:

For example, on CSI, a computer automatically matches fingerprints to those in its database. But in real life, scientists must perform such detailed work. And while DNA testing on the show is instant, in real life it takes at least a week.

There have been some obvious errors. In one episode during the first CSI season, scientists put a casting material into a stab wound and let it harden. When they pulled it out, the cast was in the shape of a knife.

"That's totally unrealistic," Gialamas said.

Real-life investigations, of course, take a lot longer than they do on television.

"We don't show any of the immense amount of documentation that has to be done in the field," said Devine, the CSI producer. "Nobody wants to see someone sitting at their desk taking notes."

Real-life forensic scientists are also often too busy to focus on a single case.

(from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/09/0923_040923_csi_2.html)

CSI being absolutely and totally accurate makes me laugh. Watch 'Forensic Files' if you want accurate. It's actually based upon real cases.

[2dlife.livejournal.com]

My fellow scientists and I treat CSI like a comedy. It works well -- we love the show. We make fun of the perfectly sectioned microscopy slides, the pure GCMS results, the instantaneous PCR etc. (It helps that we've done most of those techniques in lab before.) Accuracy!? That's probably the funniest idea I've heard all day. On the flip side, I think there are more episodes where fraternities come up and some pledge is murdered or something, but it really doesn't ruffle my feathers... I know it's not true (trust me, I hear about pretty much every time a national fraternity makes the news.) So I advise you to not be riled up either... I wouldn't say that CSI is the cause of the furry = sex stereotype.

[beetlecat.livejournal.com]

I do that too :)

I just have to laugh when they find all of the exact bits of edvidence they need for a case.

I mean one ep had them investigate a person that fell off a cliff, and they knew she fell off a cliff because some of the rocks they had collected under her body turned out to be a certain type that is only found on this cliff!

Or how, at the end of each episode, they always make these fuzzy logical leaps and the suspect *always* sees that they have it all figured out and confesses.

But, it's still good entertainment :D