I like his shows generally especially the exotic locations. The shows from Nepal were amazing.

I guess I am naive. I didn't realize that SCI was a sponsor in past years.

quote:

Originally posted by Biebs:
Once he dumped Tony Knight, I lost interest in anything he does.

I don't think he "dumped" Tony. Knight Rifles went bankrupt, and bankrupt companies don't sponsor hunting shows.

Here's a link to the announcement:

http://outdoorswithothmarvohri...es-closes-doors.html

larryshores - I to like the exotic places and animals Jim S. hunts on some of his adventures. The Shows go waaaaaay beyond the "run of the mill" stuff that overloads Outdoor Television these days.

Saeed - Dream on my friend, SCI is still and will most likely always be a BIG sponsor of Jim Shockey and his adventures. As I and others have mentioned, he is just expanding his advertising base since he has at least three different shows now.

AZ writer - I guess that's why there are so many shows out there for us to chose from. We all have something to watch. I for one enjoy the Shows that bring the family into the mix. When Jim's Dad and Father in Law (may they rest in peace) were on his shows, they were the absolute best. Having ones Family involved with all the everyday business and pleasure activities has to be at the top of the list as well.

Larry Sellers
SCI(International)Life Member
Sabatti 'trash' Double Shooter
R8 Blaser
DRSS

Mike Fell, who hunts Jim often in Tanz. Told me Jim is an absolute gentleman. Great ethics, hard working hunter.

That said, I watched his New Gineau show last night. That first deer he shot at, didn't look like a miss to me.

Steve

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
...And I have said many times a celebrity who is paid to endorse a product must identify that material relationship when they are endorsing a product in what is not an obvious ad. So smart celebrities are better off staying off the internet, lest they recommend a product to us for which they are being paid. Or perhaps they should indicate their sponsorships on their signature line.
...

I think in this day and age one should assume that a celebrity endorsing a product is getting paid for it, and take his endorsement with a grain of salt. Caveat Emptor.

quote:

Originally posted by tanks:

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
...And I have said many times a celebrity who is paid to endorse a product must identify that material relationship when they are endorsing a product in what is not an obvious ad. So smart celebrities are better off staying off the internet, lest they recommend a product to us for which they are being paid. Or perhaps they should indicate their sponsorships on their signature line.
...

I think in this day and age one should assume that a celebrity endorsing a product is getting paid for it, and take his endorsement with a grain of salt. Caveat Emptor.

Actually, the law was recently updated because there are too many people endorsing products on the internet and getting paid for it.

If you read the FTC rule it is quite clear there is no issue with an overt ad. TV shows identify sponsors. The real issues are magazine stories and especially internet blogs - there, the material connection may not be obvious, and therefore must be disclosed.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Ahrenberg:
Mike Fell, who hunts Jim often in Tanz. Told me Jim is an absolute gentleman. Great ethics, hard working hunter.

That said, I watched his New Gineau show last night. That first deer he shot at, didn't look like a miss to me.

Steve

In 2006 I was scheduled to fly out on the charter he and Eva flew when they came to hunt with Mike Fell in Tanzania.
I left early so it didn't happen. I guess I missed my opportunity to form my own opinion.

I agree with you 100% about that first shot Steve. I thought it fell initially. Blood trails in that water might be tough especially if a questionable bullet was used.

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
Shockey has only looked for more deep pockets in DSC, any org can only sponsor so many shows. As to Jim hunting "fat old men" those shows were made when he was filming his clients in BC. The Professionals were a selected well in shape group. If I remember one of the crew almost died on one of the high mt hunts. Shockey is just the current "golden boy" of AR just give it time and he will fall from grace. Talk with some of the outfitters that have hunted him.

As to Shockey seeing the light he is still a Canauk.

I hunted out of a camp with a very well known bow hunter who also books hunts in Africa. He told me Shockey stood for 12 hours in a boat waiting for a sitatunga. Personally, I have heard lots of complaining about lots of writers and media hosts, but never Shockey.

What I find amazing is how often I hear guides talk about hosting outdoor shows and then seeing something completely different on TV. A few weeks ago I heard about a writer who shot a deer with this guide's outfit on a stalk. When it came to the TV show, same writer is shown rattling in the deer.

Well, I don't watch many outdoor shows, but I very much enjoyed the few episodes of "Jim Shockeys hunting adventures" I watched.

BUT am I the the only who finds it ridiculous how they act the the professionals?
Although I enjoy to see exotics places, they ridiculously overdo the danger & challenge of their trips......

Caracal, You're not the only one. I stopped watching the "Professionals" because it got too corny.

Phil

Caracal - Not to be a butt, but have you personally been to all those exotic, challenging, foreign Country, high altitude hunts that Jim S. and Company have been too/on?? Just wonder how you can asses the "danger and challenge" factors if you have not been there done that? If you have been there done that in all those places, my hat is off to you. Just curious.

Larry Sellers
SCI(International)Life Member
Sabatti 'trash' Double Shooter
R8 Blaser
DRSS

quote:

Originally posted by Caracal:
Well, I don't watch many outdoor shows, but I very much enjoyed the few episodes of "Jim Shockeys hunting adventures" I watched.

BUT am I the the only who finds it ridiculous how they act the the professionals?
Although I enjoy to see exotics places, they ridiculously overdo the danger & challenge of their trips......

Well I have been to several of the Shockey "extreme" hunt locations; pack ice polar bear, bongo in the rain forest, plus Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan and lots up close black bear hunts. Based on my experience Caracal is correct in that the danger and difficulty is hyped. I've chuckled or winced at it many times. In the end, Shockey is no Capstick, but not for lack of trying.

Still his shows are far better than the majority of TV hunting shows. The purpose of every one of these shows is to sell something. They are marketing platforms, period.

Every hunt has its challenges and dangers.

In fact, we encounter danger in our every day lives.

May be what some are referring to is the Hollywood mentality of making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Like so many of those so called "survival" TV programs, which have become so silly by making it looks like death is waiting around every corner.

The only one I enjoy watching is Alaska Survival challenge.

@Larry Sellers
I have been to some places Jim has been to (unfortunately not all) but never felt much danger....
I have personally been to 40+ countries and hunted more then 20 countries including some more exotic places like Pakistan, Liberia, Guinea, Cameroon, Benin, Burkina etc.
All my rainforest hunts have been selfguided.

Just watched Jim's hunt in Papua New Guinea (PNG). I have worked there and it is a remote and intimidating location. I worked in the interior of the country in the highlands so I do not know the areas he hunted. All I can really tell you is the Papuans are a "like to fight" culture in the areas I was. The men was cut up with bad scars from knife fights and I hired several men that told our interpreter they had killed other men in fights.

The villages shown on the TV show were what I saw and experienced. I did not know there were Rusa deer on PNG. The locals are extremely skilled hunters and I thought most of the bigger animals were killed out. Hats of to Jim for taking on Rusa deer. I hunted them in New Zealand and they are tough, spooky and fun to hunt. I cannot imagine doing what Jim just did. I like to be "adventurous" but would never consider hunting in PNG, fishing or scuba diving - yes, but never hunting.

Caracal -

Larry Sellers
SCI(International)Life Member
Sabatti 'trash' Double Shooter
R8 Blaser
DRSS

quote:

Originally posted by Caracal:
@Larry Sellers
I have been to some places Jim has been to (unfortunately not all) but never felt much danger....
I have personally been to 40+ countries and hunted more then 20 countries including some more exotic places like Pakistan, Liberia, Guinea, Cameroon, Benin, Burkina etc.
All my rainforest hunts have been selfguided.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

What I find amazing is how often I hear guides talk about hosting outdoor shows and then seeing something completely different on TV. A few weeks ago I heard about a writer who shot a deer with this guide's outfit on a stalk. When it came to the TV show, same writer is shown rattling in the deer.

I'd bet that's true. A good friend of mine guided Larry Weishuhn years ago on a desert mule deer hunt in West Texas, where you hunt them much like you do in Sonora, MX. Let's just say his recount of the story in the magazine was not at all what actually happened.

Is the idol starting to tarnish, wow and in only a few days.

Jim seems to be a nice guy. His show is certainly entertaining but I would prefer if he could keep it a bit closer to the truth. He is not in danger every time he steps out of his door.

Guys like Shockey have the potential to improve "our" image in the public.
A man who travels the world for adventure and hunts on the way is certainly an image that is easier comprehensible to the public then some collector shooting stuff in a cage.....

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Every hunt has its challenges and dangers.

In fact, we encounter danger in our every day lives.

May be what some are referring to is the Hollywood mentality of making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Like so many of those so called "survival" TV programs, which have become so silly by making it looks like death is waiting around every corner.

The only one I enjoy watching is Alaska Survival challenge.

Saeed:
The Alaska shows are staged for the audience. Not much real in them.
Cal

Cal - I have to agree, and not only the Alaska ones, most others are also in this category. Let's all try and remember ALL these shows are produced for ENTERTAINMENT, pure and simple. The entertainment value each show puts out there is subject to the vast array of us the audience and our individual likes and dislikes.

Larry Sellers
SCI(International)Life Member
Sabatti 'trash' Double Shooter
R8 Blaser
DRSS

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Every hunt has its challenges and dangers.

In fact, we encounter danger in our every day lives.

May be what some are referring to is the Hollywood mentality of making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Like so many of those so called "survival" TV programs, which have become so silly by making it looks like death is waiting around every corner.

The only one I enjoy watching is Alaska Survival challenge.

Saeed:
The Alaska shows are staged for the audience. Not much real in them.
Cal

I know one of the guys on Life Below Zero. He says there is a element of staging.

quote:

Originally posted by Die Ou Jagter:
Shockey has only looked for more deep pockets in DSC, any org can only sponsor so many shows. As to Jim hunting "fat old men" those shows were made when he was filming his clients in BC. The Professionals were a selected well in shape group. If I remember one of the crew almost died on one of the high mt hunts. Shockey is just the current "golden boy" of AR just give it time and he will fall from grace. Talk with some of the outfitters that have hunted him.

As to Shockey seeing the light he is still a Canauk.

Die ou Jagter,

he s certainly more a US guy than you will imagine. i m still waiting for him raising and voicng about using any black rifle for hunting in Canada. what he did when he decided to not go in some shows after a shooting in USA was great but still hoping ot hear his voice about that in Canada ... we can dream.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
I know one of the guys on Life Below Zero. He says there is a element of staging.

i ve guided some of the ``stars`` of the hunting shows and they re well staged ... the most funny was one team came with goretex clothing taken and put on just when the camera was on the rest of the mine Helly Hansen was on lol .... what can be done just to sell sone clothing ....

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:
...All I can really tell you is the Papuans are a "like to fight" culture in the areas I was. The men was cut up with bad scars from knife fights and
I hired several men that told our interpreter they had killed other men in fights.

Such violence is predominantly inter-family or inter-tribal based conflict.

Some good number of yrs ago, I met with Nancy Wii, one of the first native PNG female commercial pilots.
Nancy ended up flying for MBA, then went on to the PNG defence force.
Now, Despite her fathers position and influence in the modern sector of PNG society and Nancys western education,
she explained to me that,the native rule still holds strong in their family and tribal structure.
i.e.; you do the wrong thing by tribal law and it quite likely that one or more of your family members can be hacked to death for it.
Which I believe did happen to some of Nancys close family members.

However, white man working or lost in the PNG wilderness and in need of help, would receive assistance from such natives.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
I know one of the guys on Life Below Zero. He says there is a element of staging.

If there is any commercial aspect, there WILL be an element of staging.

But, I don't mind that as long as it is kept to a reasonable degree.

It becomes very silly, and unproductive, when it is taken to great lengths, and tries to assume the viewers are stupid.

Like a show sponsored by Nikon and they have someone with a Leupold scope on his rifle, and the blanks the name of the scope.

Or have bloody stickers every where, like on the stock of the rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

Like a show sponsored by Nikon and they have someone with a Leupold scope on his rifle, and the blanks the name of the scope.

Bear Grylls avoids that by using products with his own label on it bearing his name...


Lets be realistic, Be it Grylls or anyone else, they are not true raw adventure shows,
They are not an observational documentary show,
but a 'how to' guide for inept nerds in basic survival techniques in extreme environments.
Such nerds will probably never venture past the TV screen.
anyways, Do any of these such programs explicitly claim that the presenters experience is one of genuine unaided solo survival?

quote:

Originally posted by Trax:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

Like a show sponsored by Nikon and they have someone with a Leupold scope on his rifle, and the blanks the name of the scope.

Bear Grylls avoids that by using products with his own label on it bearing his name...

Yes, but he is one of the biggest frauds on TV too!

So BG stayed in hotels while filming, its an entertainment orientated 'how to guide' that he produces, not a raw observational documentary.

What is not fraudulent is his service with the British SAS(R)..(21 SAS), that he Passed UK Special Forces Selection, trained in unarmed combat,
desert and winter warfare, combat survival, patrol medic, parachuting, signals & communication, evasive driving, climbing etc.


Please tell which commercial TV survival show series based in any part of the world, is not staged to some degree.

I like Bruce Parry best of all the English so called "survivalists"

Mark and Olie are two very good ones too.

Others, seem to be hell bent on showing us how hard it is for them to survive every bloody second in the wild.

The part I like about all these shows.
My tv has an OFF button.
Then it's weeks or months before it's turned on again.
George

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
I know one of the guys on Life Below Zero. He says there is a element of staging.

If there is any commercial aspect, there WILL be an element of staging.

But, I don't mind that as long as it is kept to a reasonable degree.

It becomes very silly, and unproductive, when it is taken to great lengths, and tries to assume the viewers are stupid.

Like a show sponsored by Nikon and they have someone with a Leupold scope on his rifle, and the blanks the name of the scope.

Or have bloody stickers every where, like on the stock of the rifle.

I agree about the stickers on the stock - looks pathetic. However, if you are endorsing Nikon scopes and stating or implying they are the scopes you use, then you are breaking the FTC rule by being shown using a competing product.

I personally don't have a problem with stickers on stocks & such. Heck, they're paying for the show, we aren't.
If I was a major sponsor of a show I would have my product advertised in everyway I could to maximize my advertising budget.
I also don't take celebrity endorsements of products seriously.
When a celeb goes from a Swarovski scope & binos to a Nikon or Bushnell you know $$$$ are the reason. Nothing wrong with that I guess, I'm just not falling for it.

IMO, if you think about this, you will see the fact that it is a difficult thing to put a month of hunting into a one hour show, or even in a two hour DVD without some editing that has to include a certain amount of staging. That staging is usually something that actually happened but was not caught on film from an angle that it could be seen.

In that editing one must still make the film interesting. This no difference than writing a book on hunting, some literary license is needed unless you want a dry as a bone outcome. Then you add on the films having to include a sponsor’s injection into the film, and what you are left with is what you see on the tele!

The stickers, and logos on shirts, rifles and such are most times insisted on by sponsors, and that applies to all film makers for TV shows. That is just one of the down sides to commercial film making.

I’ve never been one to watch hunting shows that involve the modern in-line muzzleloaders. They simply do nothing for me, but what I have always liked Shockey’s final page in the magazine. That was funny as hell, and I hated it when he dropped that to go into his new gigs!

I haven’t seen any of his hunting films, and I doubt I will, but not because of an stickers or logos, it is just that the firearms he uses do not interest me, but if I did I could live with the things everyone is complaining about. As long as the TV has a channel button, I can watch other things.

.................................................................

quote:

Originally posted by bwana cecil:
I personally don't have a problem with stickers on stocks & such. Heck, they're paying for the show, we aren't.
If I was a major sponsor of a show I would have my product advertised in everyway I could to maximize my advertising budget.
I also don't take celebrity endorsements of products seriously.
When a celeb goes from a Swarovski scope & binos to a Nikon or Bushnell you know $$$$ are the reason. Nothing wrong with that I guess, I'm just not falling for it.

But if a writer or media host comes on AR and recommends a product based on someone else's question or inquiry, then you (or others) might think they are giving you their honest opinion. However, if they are recommending a product for which they are being paid to endorse, they must acknowledge that. Pretty simple rule, often violated on AR.

I'd say more often than not when a tv show changes sponsors it was the sponsor's decision and not that of the show yet the greedy dollar chasing TV show host always gets blamed. TV shows are big business with big expenses and manufacturers are also in big business with big expenses....often business decisions need to be made by both. There would be no hunting on television without sponsors but then I guess we could could all bitch about how there's no hunting on television..............

You are no doubt correct. However, there are ways for a sponsor to get ones attention in a positive way. Similarly, there are ways to gets ones attention in a negative way.

For example, wearing Hornady hats or having the Hornady ammo box out when guns are being loaded or zeroed is a positive thing IMHO. However, the Hornady stickers on the guns was not at all a positive thing in my opinion. If anything, it made it much less likely that I would either (a) buy a Hornady product or (b) be influenced by the spokesperson.

Others may feel differently.

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
You are no doubt correct. However, there are ways for a sponsor to get ones attention in a positive way. Similarly, there are ways to gets ones attention in a negative way.

For example, wearing Hornady hats or having the Hornady ammo box out when guns are being loaded or zeroed is a positive thing IMHO. However, the Hornady stickers on the guns was not at all a positive thing in my opinion. If anything, it made it much less likely that I would either (a) buy a Hornady product or (b) be influenced by the spokesperson.

Others may feel differently.

Yep.

We know they have to show their products, and we can see that.

But, treating us like a bunch of idiots is not going to work.

amen to that. do any of you guys have stickers on your rifle?? somehow i doubt it. such blatant commercialism sucks.

Seems to me Shockey and Boddington sell themselves to the highest bidder. That said, is the stuff they promote as good as they say or as they are paid to say? That's why I stopped reading Boddington's books as they seem to be written to sell products rather than tell the readers about the hunt, the rifles, etc. Safari Rifles 1 is on my bookshelf, SR 2 was discarded.
Just my opinion.
Cal