The Briefcase

this is suppose to be struggling families?! Having in-vitro does not constitute struggling! I am struggling with losing my husband and my house within 4 years! ill be homeless within 3 months! and there are far more struggling than these people! why not pick the people who really need it for survival and not for pregnancy or college! I will not watch this program again i'll say that! I know I would keep less than half and give away the rest! if i even keep that much! I will watch this one episode to see just how it ends, but from the start...forget it! it should be more realistic with who is struggling! I can't see in-vitro being a struggle...that's their choice... they cant afford it oh well...they still have a roof over their head and food on their table! why not give it to more deserving people?

OK the person before me said "...to mock poor people.." That is exactly what this show does, it makes me think, this is the way Congress sees the Middle Class: they are not struggling, and if they are it is their own fault. This show stated "Poor" people, how did they come up with their contestant list? What was the criteria to get on the show? Because the real poor people are not being represented on this show: in-vitro or ice cream truck business (I used contestants on 2 different episodes, so no spoilers here:) I understand it is a show about "Morality", I see the show as a way to put a spotlight on the upper middle class and to see if they are selfish or are they selfless. I guess there will never be a show that shows what "real" poverty looks like. Our state representatives don't know what the poor or poverty stricken really looks like. I wouldn't even put me on that show and I am terminally ill and unable to work and my husband recently lost his job. But I had a great paying job before I became ill and I had LTD insurance so my suffering is not as bad as some disabled people that receive Social Security.

American family that owns big multinational corporation, experiencing massive liquidity problem and is about to default is given a briefcase with $101 million . But there is a twist and potentially life-changing decision for them to make. They can keep all of the money or give $ 100 million to another family that owns indebted multinational corporation and is experiencing the same financial disaster. Would the first family give away the money ( or some of the money) and let their company's stocks dive down in the stock exchange, as they find out that what really matters in life are values such as love, generosity and faith.

Oops, sorry I think I got this wrong. The show is actually about hard working American families that are presented with the same dilemma. The only difference is that ( proportionally) they are given $ 101 000 and that their apparent poverty is called " financial setback " . Let's be honest, is hilarious to be poor. This TV show essentially sends a message that you will be forgiven for being poor on condition that you place utmost importance on values like "altruism, generosity and faith".

But if you read it as a part of the vast fabric of Reality TV shows, if you place it next to the " Apprentice " -which deals with middle class ( or well off) people- that applauds fierce ambition and competitiveness , you will notice the twisted social narrative of our world.

The show tried to push the idea of the importance of autism , which is absolutely fine. But the premise they chose is totally wrong. If they would have done the show with contestants from different social class ( yes, class ) probably it would've worked.

But watching poor, hard working families mocked like this, makes me feel like a spectator in the Roman Coliseum staring at bunch of slaves- that are forced to fight each other- and speculate as to should they spare the life of their opponent ( and give up their own ) in the name of selflessness and love.

And I thought Reality Television couldn't get worst.

How this was pitched in the first place, no idea. How this was then agreed upon by a network panel is even more beyond belief. How it has made it even onto National TV network is a disgraced. There are surely ethical or moral infringements this 'show' is making. Emotionally torturing families and individuals who have already gone through their own personal hell and grief, that they decide to broadcast further inflictions onto the 'contestants' and make them feel guilty for what seemed like a generous gift. Fills me with disgust this type of show was considered in the first place - a show where you pin the grief & financial stricken families against each other. Its not generous, its sick amusement!

I only ended up watching The Briefcase because it was what was on when I turn on the TV... There was a cute couple on the show riding around in a van where the male, Amari, actually ended up being transgender (formerly female)... I thought, this is interesting. What could this show possibly be about?

Well, it ended up being a show where struggling middle class families and/or truly poor people end up pitted against each other to see what each family will do with $100,000 given to both couples in a "briefcase". Will they keep it; give some away; or give all of it away to help the other family? Really?

What a horrible premise! Why make struggling families choose between keeping money and/or helping others? It's absurd. And it's crazy cause the family that needed it the most actually ended up giving $5,000 more than the family that was clearly better off.

To add insult to injury the producers try to add drama to the show by (a la Wife Swap) pitting families against each other with the most extreme opposite values or lifestyles, knowing that doing so will likely affect each family's decision on what to do with the money. Somehow this is supposed to be entertainment? That's like going down to the local social services office and watching families compete for welfare and food stamps... Again, REALLY?