Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Hill
I don't really see this show staying on the air very long. There's no real analysis or commentary. It's all so...shallow "Oh, these robots are SO DIFFERENT!". I guess that's what you get when none of the commentators have any technical experience.
|
Actually, Battlebots
has debuted to strong ratings against its competitor networks and has had
some pretty great reviews thus far. I liked
this article best, personally.
My opinion appears to differ sharply from yours. I'm no engineer but have worked for companies in robotics education, production, or engineering consulting for my entire professional career. As a result I hold myself as a fairly decent barometer between the never-exposed, technically clueless and the well-versed robotics community.
At first I was uncertain when I saw that they are using sports reporters alongside STEM personalities. That changed sharply when I saw Bobak Ferdowsi featured, and when I heard Kenny Florian explain the transfer of kinetic energy in the first episode (he's actually very articulate without the appearance of dumbing it down for the masses and I've come to appreciate his weigh-in on the matches). While for nostalgia's sake I was sad to not see Mark Beiro return, they've captured that boxing introduction element perfectly with Faruq Tauheed.
See, if we keep touting that we're participating in a sport for the mind and if we keep trying to get our schools to lend robotics the same legitimacy that sports programs enjoy, we have to include that sports community in what we're trying to accomplish. I'm not saying the whole of America are completely stupid, but Jim Jefferies said it best in that "we have to walk as slow as our slowest person to keep society moving". You cannot introduce someone to Battlebots for the first time and assume that they understand the complicated intricacies and history of robotics competitions. The net-in-a-box was a great example - the casual viewer probably thought the birthday surprise by Complete Control was awesome, but the rest of us knew that there was no way the refs were going to let that fly. Made for great TV, though!
Yes, they weigh categories such as "Defense" and "Aggressiveness" which are somewhat subjective, general, and atypical metrics that you would use to analyze a combat robot. As a community of strategists and robot builders, we know that. America may not know that. Those arbitrary stats are a great general indicator for, say, a small child who has never been exposed to robotics before Battlebots. This show can be a starting point without having exhaustive analysis and still get the point across.
In the blurbs that have featured women engineers/builders on the show, they have all been shown as equals to their male peers without expressly calling that out. There's very little of the special, rare unicorn mentality and these women have done an amazing job of spreading the message of "I wanted to do this, so I did it." The message from all builders, from all backgrounds, of all genders and ages, has been that they are interested in competitive robotics and they do this because they think it is cool. I could go on and on about how I think ABC is doing this particular part of the show so very, very right, but I'll keep that for another post at another time.
By showing the builders, by explaining their professions and backgrounds, the masses will start to see that building a robot is an attainable goal that isn't just for the super-nerdy male engineering stereotype. It gives them the opportunity to build allegiance to a team and that will keep viewers coming back week after week to see how "their" robot has done. It's the same as shows like Amazing Race or the Bachelorette or whatever, right? You always want "your" contestant to win. So even those that are watching with no intention of getting involved themselves, they become invested in the outcome. Maybe they have kids who watch alongside, and discover the robotics team in their school. And just like that, you have a new generation invested in learning about technology application and getting ready for their big trip to Louisville or St. Louis.
I think they have found the perfect intersection between those who have no technical expertise and usually tune in to watch Honey Boo Boo-esque programming, and those who are professional engineers who are dying to build their own Battlebot. What you're perceiving as shallow is playing Mozart to the masses in the starting format of a children's lullaby. It will catch on, and the show can improve on some of the technical commentary once it has been further established and approved for more than just 6 quick episodes. This is an exceptionally difficult middle ground to navigate, and frankly I'm pretty pleased that ABC has done it so well. It could have been rebooted very poorly and the sport would have significant hurdles to overcome before being televised ever again, but the program's success is shared success for the acceptance and beginning of mainstream competitive robotics.
Fingers are crossed for Season 2 to be announced any day now!