Daredevil moves weren't anything new in media. To the contrary, stuntmen like Evil Knievel based his career on dangerous maneuvers which often resulted in injuries. Knievel's knack for recovery kept him actively entertaining audiences for fifteen years.
The idea of horseplay as entertainment perplexes me. While fail content is not entertainment of the stick-em-up spaghetti western kind, or doesn't offer the finesse of a Quentin Tarantino flick, (who by the way draws inspiration from spaghetti westerns!), self imposed risk-taking entertainment stems from the notion that horseplay is survivable and yes, it's funny!
What part of watching people on the verge of concussion or being frightened out of their skins by hiding pranksters behind closed doors, or popping out of inanimate objects such as garbage pails when least expected, is entertaining? The need to shock relies on a fight or flight response rather than a thoughtful one.
Safety video content isn't exactly entertaining. It's not meant for that purpose. That doesn't mean safety videos can't be compelling or entertaining. They can! Think back to your own experience of grade school fire drills. What part of that was most fun? Was it filing out of the building like automatons or reacting to screeching sirens that had a lasting effect? The siren signaled the behavior - namely get out quick or things might get hot. Filming a fire drill would include the before and after states: the cause, (siren), and the desired effect, (kids exiting). A good camera operator would likely capture the excitement that ensued.
A final note, when pranks become fodder for entertainment what does that say about regard for safety? Do high ratings of shows like America's Funniest Video signify people like the ridiculous? Or are they celebrating with injured and embarrassed subjects in their 'fifteen minutes of fame' moments?
