How do you feel about " To Catch a Predator" on NBC?

Question

1. Advertisers Wary of ‘To Catch a Predator’

NBC’s sting-operation segments “To Catch a Predator” have scored solid ratings and created positive buzz among viewers, but the network appears to be scaling back its commitment to the program — because the content reportedly makes advertisers uneasy.

So far this year NBC has filmed only one sting operation for the program — which airs as a segment of its “Dateline NBC” newsmagazine — compared with seven last year.

The most recent episode, on July 25, included six national spot ads, significantly fewer than normal for a show in NBC’s prime time, according to The New York Times.

“Some advertisers say they are wary of being associated with the show’s content, in which men lured to a house by the promise of a sexual encounter are instead surprised by [host Chris] Hansen and then arrested,” the Times reports.

And Andy Donchin, a director at the ad agency Carat USA, told the Times: “We’re all concerned with what content we’re associating ourselves with.”

The program’s producers work with a pedophile watchdog group, Perverted Justice, whose members pose as underage Internet users and converse with adults in chat rooms. If a conversation turns sexual, the “underage” Web surfer agrees to meet the adult in person. When the adult arrives at the meeting place, he is confronted by Hansen and a film crew and arrested by local police.

The program — which first aired in November 2004 — is currently facing two lawsuits, one stemming from a suicide.

Perverted Justice maintains that Louis Conradt, a prosecutor in Terrell, Texas, engaged in sexual conversations online, but he did not show up at the meeting place. Police obtained an arrest warrant, and as officers and “Predator” crewmembers approached his home, Conradt shot himself in the head on Nov. 5, 2006. His sister filed a lawsuit against NBC in July, seeking $105 million in damages.

In the other suit, former “Dateline” producer Marsha Bartel asserted that she was fired because she opposed what she called the program’s unethical production practices. She contends that Perverted Justice did not keep accurate transcripts of the online conversations between the predators and the watchdog group’s members.

Brian Montopoli of the CBS News Public Eye blog — and a former staffer at the Columbia Journalism Review — has maintained that the program is in some cases a form of entrapment.

He has also argued that while legal punishment of predators is left to police and prosecutors, airing the suspects on national television is already a form of punishment that the media has no right to inflict.

In addition to the bad publicity and advertiser reticence, “Predator” is also expensive to produce, according to the Times.

Regarding the network’s seeming reluctance to commit to the show, Brad Adgate, senior vice president for research at the ad-buying agency Horizon Media, told the Times: “NBC’s probably thinking about what their return on investment is, and might be thinking it’s better to move on.”

Answer 1

A clear violation of Due Process. The men need to be convicted before exposing them on television or else it violates the Constitution.

I also think it gives a false impression of child abuse . . . most children are abused by people they know, often members of their own family, and not by strangers.

I also think that its mainly just another reality TV show . . . people watch it to see others humiliated just like Indian Idol, they don't change their behaviours because of it because they think it will never happen to them.

Answer 2

In regard tot he show in general I think that it's a mixed bag. While I think that it's definitely an issue that needs to be addressed and stopped, I also feel that there are a lot of ramifications with doing so on national television. Considering the number of men that are on the show actually WATCH the show, it's obviously not working to prevent the criminal activities.

Toward the legality of it, the average person included in the production tape, and the story line that is spun, appears to be directed at the "least sophisticated" people. Never do they ask for a lawyer, and frequently they openly admit to their criminal behavior. All without an attorney.

In addition the individuals included in the show are effectively having their lives ruined. This isn't your name listed in a local newspaper and a few nosy neighbors kind of ruined, but prime time national news ruined. While no one will say that their alleged crimes are justifiable, or that they should be given saint hood, they should be given the opportunity to pay for their mistakes and the potential to live a normal life afterwards, and not solicit minors for sex.

Once it's publicized in such a way, that potential is gone.

From an advertising standpoint the association is going to be a strong one. And there is a strong question to answer if you do spend the advertising dollars to support the show. Are you supporting an effort to protect innocent children online? Or are you supporting an attempt to ruin and/or destroy the lives of people who are obviously in need of treatment for some very serious mental health issues?

One looks good to consumers, the other doesn't. And in the shows current form it looks more and more like the latter is the actual situation that is occurring.

Perhaps if the show had a greater focus on getting these alleged criminals help than creating a "if it bleeds, it leads" story line, they might find themselves in a more supported position. Help to remove predators from the internet and rehabilitate them, give them a fighting chance at a real life.

But that would probably have lower ratings and viewers in our rubber necking, dog eat dog, murder death kill obsessed world.

Answer 3

Sounds like you or one of your loved ones were caught in a sting.

All television is about in general is cost to produce, ratings, and public opinion in any and every case.

Legally, it is not entrapment; Perverted Justice have a very strict regime that they have to follow and are screen heavily before they become actual online volunteers to catch predators. Once they gain approval, they put up a Yahoo ID that indicate they are a minor boy/girl between the age of 12-17, the perverts have to initiate conversation in a private chatroom and introduce sex in the conversation; the participants are only allowed to act like a possibly messed up pre-teen/teen would in their responses.

As long as the show brings in the ratings, there will always be a sponsor that wants to fill the time slot and so far, so good.

Answer 4

I think it is compelling, addictive television. I can watch those episodes over and over, like I am hooked on them. It is scary to know they are only skimming the surface of who must be out there willing to prey on kids.

It has taught us too, that this internet trolling by men is more of a compulsion, as by now most of them know about To Catch a Predator, and here they are, showing up at a house anyway, some of them even mentioning the show by name.

I don't feel it is unfair to the men, as Perverted Justice merely act as a decoy, the men do all the work. The men get to the house on their own steam. It is a decision on their part.

But compelling TV as it is, it is getting repetitive. I continue to marvel at the variety of men who walk up that driveway, but the same thing over and over; perhaps Dateline NBC is right to go on to something else. The point has been made.

Answer 5

I am for it. The "liberal biased media" that all the conservatives have complained about all these years, has done a public service by doing these reports and not just by talking about them. It has also shown us that the perverts involved, are not the stereotypical "chester the molester" types. They are what we have been led to believe is the normal hard working people of America, except that they are perverts that have immoral and unnatural affection.

Answer 6

Money talks and BS walks.

That is all I need to say.

But I will do say more. As important as this story is; if the ad revenue isn't there; then they won't keep running the story.

The networks are in it for the money not the viewer.

Answer 7

They should leave this activity to the police.

There have been several instances when the target was not prosecuted because NBC compromised the evidence or investigation.

Answer 8

If somebody can take these sick predators off the streets, the better. I'm all for it. Makes me feel safer every time they catches the bad guys. At least somebody is doing the job!

Answer 9

I think it definitely sets people up, while also showing how incredibly stupid and perverted some Americans are.

Answer 10

i love and love the show,

it is evil for older man to want to have sex with young girls or young man. if there is a way of catching them and bringing them to the law then bring it on.