What Would You Do? Paper
The American television news magazine and hidden camera show entitled “Primetimes: What Would You Do? “, which aired their first episode in February 2008 and still continue to do so, reveal how bystanders react to certain situations of conflict or Illegal actively In a public setting acted out by professional actors. However, there have been Instances In the series wherein some people do not even Intervene in what’s happening before them, be It good or bad. An example of these scenarios Is a waiter reprimanding an overweight woman for ordering food with high calorie intent with the reason being that he is Just “helping her out”.
The show also does variations of these scenarios to see if and how these bystanders will react. For the example mentioned above, there is a different version wherein the waiter is replaced by a pretty waitress and sadly, in a diner filled with mostly men, these men do not defend the overweight woman and even extend their concern for the waitress, instead. The episode I had chosen centers around a homeless man who, after being helped by a good Samaritan by gang him money for food, Is denied service by the bartender f the restaurant simply because of the fact that he Is homeless.
He also states that this homeless man is “bad for business”. Most of the people targeted in the series take the side of the homeless man in the argument, saying that he has the right to eat at the restaurant same as any other person because he can and will pay for it. Two pairs of friends, though, take the side of the bartender saying that the homeless man’s appearance and the way he smelled was distracting and was grossing them out. There Is one particular person in the episode who, I think, displayed a strong sense of omniscience toward the homeless man.
At first, he was Joking around with the bartender about the homeless man but when the bartender took the money the good Samaritan gave the homeless man, the bystander took a stand, asking the bartender to buy alcohol and drugs and says that the reason why those people are homeless is because they wasted their money. The bystander tells the bartender that “he doesn’t know that”, defending the homeless man who “looks like a decent guy’ to him. This is where his conscience kicks in and the bystander starts amphetamine with the homeless man.
A couple of minutes later, the bystander does a 180 and turns from laughing at the homeless man to making the bartender make the homeless man a sandwich. He even offers to personally hand-deliver the sandwich to the homeless man and says mire’s welcome, enjoy’ and offers him a beer from the bar. When John Quinine’s, the TV show host, comes out and interviews Anthony Gambling, the bystander who had a change of heart, he asks him what exactly made him change his mind about the homeless man.
He answers, muff know Vive had some hard times in my life and other people were there for me so I try and do the same thing. His conscience made him realize that the man, albeit being homeless, is still a person who deserves respect Just like any other person. He was slowly becoming aware of how his words and his actions were affecting the homeless man and it made him rethink of how he would handle the situation and how he would redeem himself and he did exactly that by telling the bartender that he shouldn’t be quick to Judge other people by how the person looks and what the person’s state of living is.
II. Positive and Negative Points The positive points in the video were definitely how the two old men and the younger en treated the homeless man. They treated him with respect and they looked past the homeless man’s appearance and saw him as Just another person ordering lunch in a restaurant. They weren’t quick to Judge the other person and that’s how we should all be.
We shouldn’t let a person’s appearance or state of living affect our perception of the person because we don’t know what this person went through to end up in that state and we don’t know all the hardships and the problems he encountered that made him land where he is now and we should always remember that a person’s past doesn’t determine his future. The negative point in the video is how the two men and the two women reacted toward the homeless man. The two women told the bartender to make the homeless man a to-go instead of eating inside because his smell bothered them and didn’t ruin their appetite but “it didn’t help”, either.
The two men, on the other hand, didn’t even acknowledge the homeless man and acted as if he wasn’t there in the first place. John Quinine’s asked one of the men about his opinion about the homeless man and he said that he shouldn’t have entered the restaurant to get lunch there and he would’ve gotten it in a different and more appropriate location, saying that it was the “wrong place”. This is the problem with people nowadays, we are too Judgmental and we’re too quick to Judge someone based on how they look.
This also applies to that this person will immediately cause problems Just because we think that they will even if they won’t and this is the very cause of conflict. People won’t retaliate if you don’t offend them. Ill. Importance/Relevance of Conscience as Presented in the Video The importance of conscience in the video was that it made most of the yesterdays help or defend the homeless man because they knew in their minds and in their hearts that what they did was right, not only for the benefit of the homeless man but also for their state of mind.
Conscience makes us realize what is morally right and it’s usually the part of our mind, which makes us rethink our decisions and our actions and how it affects a person or even ourselves. After doing something good, we usually encounter this feeling of satisfaction from what we did because conscience makes us aware that we did was, in fact, right so we feel elated and happy because we knew we did good.