I'm Gay | News

BigGayDeal.com
« Watch: Newt Gingrich Confronted Over Affair, Gay Rights Hypocrisy | Main | James Franco to Present 12-Hour Re-Cut of 'My Own Private Idaho' Featuring Hustler Interviews, Dreamy River Phoenix Montages »

02/23/2011

What Would You Do? Dad Comes Out to His Unaccepting Son in Public

Wwyd

ABC News' What Would You Do? had a father come out to his unaccepting homophobic son in a crowded diner to see how people reacted.

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

Posted Feb 23, 2011 at 9:05 AM EST by in I'm Gay, News | Permalink

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Another terrific segment from a great show. This is like "Candid Camera" with a conscience. They've aired quite a few scenarios dealing with homophobia, as well as racism and sexism. The segment about the "waiter with HIV" was very powerful!! Let's hope the show stays on the air. I encourage everyone to watch it.

    Posted by: Gene Knapp | Feb 23, 2011 10:02:08 AM


  2. Am I the only one that refuses to watch this program?

    Don't get me wrong, I've seen an episode or two... I remember when John Quinones had some integrity.

    Posted by: Pete n SFO | Feb 23, 2011 10:03:52 AM


  3. No Pete, you aren't. ABC might as well be out there creating fake traffic accidents, body parts scattered on the pavement, and a fake fight between two drivers just to catch video of people rubber necking. What they are doing is totally unethical and has nothing to do with journalism.

    After to Catch a Predator I didn't think these 'news' magazine shows couldn't sink any lower. Looks like I was wrong.

    Posted by: badlydrawnbear | Feb 23, 2011 10:19:00 AM


  4. This show makes me vomit.

    Posted by: Tweety | Feb 23, 2011 11:20:27 AM


  5. I remember when they did a segment on a segment with a gay couple looking obviously "together" (i.e. holding hands and occasionally giving a kiss, etc.). They tried it in two states (I think it was NJ and AL). In New Jersey, people tended to come to the defense of the gay couple, while in Alabama, the police arrived because (horrors!) a man kissed another man.

    This segment was obviously done only in the liberal Northeast. It may start a conversation, but really does little to shine light on the problem of homophobia in the more backward parts of the country.

    Posted by: GregV | Feb 23, 2011 11:58:57 AM


  6. I also dislike this show intensely - you can view it as "Candid Camera with a conscience", or you can view it as Candid Camera turned vicious. The whole purpose of the program is to entrap innocent passers-by into showing their worst qualities on national television, thereby enabling audiences sitting safely at home to look down on them and enjoy the smug (and probably mistaken) conviction that THEY would have said something and stood up for what's right, true, and good under the same circumstances. It's only a matter of time before ABC stages a gang rape to see how long it will take for someone to try to stop it.

    Posted by: Sancho | Feb 23, 2011 12:08:21 PM


  7. The kid is pretty cute.

    Posted by: KD | Feb 23, 2011 12:29:11 PM


  8. You guys are clearly missing the point of the show. It's uncomfortable to watch, but in almost every segment good wins out and it gives you a bit of hope for humanity. And it's not always in the "liberal Northeast". There was one recently in AZ where a security guard confronted some "possible illegals" in a restaurant. Every single time the scenario was done, people came to their defense. There was one woman who was even talking about helping them escape and offering them a ride if the security guard called the police. I find the show pretty uplifting and not because I see so many people doing the wrong thing and feel better about myself, but because I see so many people doing the RIGHT thing.

    Posted by: AJ | Feb 23, 2011 12:48:02 PM


  9. I agree with AJ. What's the big deal? Yes, people are being entraped into sharing their opinions but I don't feel like it would be such an affront to me if it happened. What's the difference between how you would act on the street than on TV? I think it's the reflection of reality that has people soured. Everyone is entitled to their own privacy, but people living their lives with conscience and humanity shouldn't have anything to fear from a recording device. And yes, many of these people are doing the right thing. It's amazing to hear these stories.

    Posted by: RyRy | Feb 23, 2011 1:33:14 PM


  10. I am encouraged by the show. I figure the more people see others doing the right thing and speaking up, defending those who need defending, etc., the easier it is for others inclined to do the same thing who might otherwise be too timid to take the risk.

    Posted by: jtaskw | Feb 23, 2011 3:30:10 PM


  11. E x p l o i t a t i v e

    And a heck of a lot cheaper to produce than real journalism.

    Posted by: BobN | Feb 23, 2011 3:52:48 PM


  12. I've barely seen the show but I like it well enough.
    It did seem like that older woman spoke up partly because she'd just seen the similar scenario on the show.

    Maybe the show makes people think about what the right thing to do is and makes them more likely to act.

    Posted by: Shawn | Feb 23, 2011 5:40:28 PM


  13. Sorry, I couldn't get through a minute of this video. This isn't news, and its not good journalism. This is a reality show, its Candid Camera without the laugh track, and that makes me way more uncomfortable than any fake conversation that those two ACTORS were going to have.

    Posted by: Ealan75 | Feb 23, 2011 8:06:51 PM


  14. The whole 'What Would You Do' concept is ethically flawed. It sits on the exact same moral grounds as performing psychological experimentation on uninformed subjects. It's just wrong. Period.

    Posted by: Justin L Werner | Feb 23, 2011 10:22:00 PM


  15. Why would anyone be so thoughtless to do something like that in a public space? Only on TV do people go to restaurants to break big news to loved ones.

    Posted by: Xwards | Feb 23, 2011 11:00:54 PM


  16. On one hand, it's completely exploitative, and I hate that; I think I would probably be a bit angry being led on like that.


    However, at the same time, the show helps me believe in humanity. I see people around my college campus preaching about everyone going to hell, and all the anti-gay craziness around the world, and sometimes it gets to me; this show, exploitative as it is, makes me believe in people a bit more.

    Posted by: Yuki | Feb 24, 2011 12:20:06 AM


  17. To all the folks crying over how "exploitative" this show is... It's not. The people that you are able to identify on this show have all given fully informed consent to be in it. They've signed paperwork granting permission to use the footage of the scenes that they're in, and they've been told exactly for what purpose the footage will be used. Anyone who hasn't given permission has been blurred out so ABC doesn't risk a lawsuit. Now how many blurry people do you see in that scene above?

    Posted by: JDB | Feb 24, 2011 5:29:27 PM


  18. The old lady at the end was incredibly sweet! Beyond that, I noticed all sorts of problematic language about "choice" and "lifestyle"...YIKES!

    Posted by: redball | Feb 27, 2011 2:39:21 AM


  19. While I don't find this show nearly as offensive as the "Predator" garbage put forth by NBC (no wonder their network tanked) but I am still offended that ABC has found it necessary to fabricate these situations in an attempt to prove a point.

    People have to remember that in order for these segments to appear the unsuspecting participants have to sign a release - this means that the most vulgar ugly displays are never aired. Those who need to learn a lesson from this type of stunt never do and those you might learn from seeing others spew their hate wouldn't be bothered watching these shows anyway.

    I guess overall it isn't anymore unrealistic or offensive as some 30 something bachelor slobbering over a hot tub full of half naked drunk women in order to find a "perfect" mate.

    Posted by: Nelson | Feb 28, 2011 3:48:16 PM


  20. JDB, informed consent is when you tell someone you are experimenting on them BEFORE, not after! What ABC is doing is post-experiment consent, which is not ethical.

    Posted by: eeh | Jan 20, 2012 10:20:22 PM


Post a comment









« «Watch: Newt Gingrich Confronted Over Affair, Gay Rights Hypocrisy« «