Given the number of people screwed by the various current corporate scandals and pension fund problems and CEO pay levels, it's natural there would be some backlash. Plus some old-fashioned envy.
But it's also not surprising that people are getting murdered on Law & Order, and that "businessmen" - a rather large, catch-all designation, yes? - are involved in a lot of the plot lines.
Let's consider this from a writer's perspective, and see what pops loose. What are the three cliches you need for murder? Means, motive, and opportunity. Greed is a very common motive when it comes to television shows: where to find it in the world the average viewer can connect with quickly? Business is right up there, don't you think? Money provides motive and means, and close working quarters opportunity. (Mighty attractive trifecta there, don't ya think? Saves a lot of time introducing two characters, explaining why one would kill another, and so on.)
As an avid fan of Perry Mason and a casual viewer of Law and Order, I have a little bit of material (as a fan!) with which to compare and contrast the different eras. Businessmen provided more than a few suspects for Mr. Mason, even if they weren't always the killer. Wills and inheritors were a common plot device, and that particular motive has popped up in a few new shows as well-- but times have changed, and a show that continually picked on children of the wealthy might have a little trouble gaining traction with a large number of viewers. No, if greed is one standby motive, the pool of 'usual suspects' is going to contain an awful lot of businessmen.
What about drug dealers and gangsters? I dunno about the current state of the show, but in the early years, Law and Order was more than willing to attribute vast numbers of murders to mob members who figured in the plot-- but not so much the central murder of the episode. Does this mean mobsters 'get off easy' in the L&O world? Hardly, I'd say-- they just aren't as "interesting", that's all.
"Interesting" is what clears out a lot of other typical murderers from scripts as well. Drug dealers? Street punks? Where's the character exploration, the slow unveiling of a pleasant facade? And in the case of L&O, the criminal has to have a crime that occupies the legal team, and not just the cops. Street dealers rarely have enough money to make the legal angle believable. If you want this kind of stuff, go read Ed McBain.
Serial killers are also an option, but for some reason they don't seem to mix well with ensemble casts, especially when syndication dictates writers getting two shows- at most!- to resolve a story arc, at least off cable television. Serial killers are terrain for individual detectives- DCI Tennison, Alex Delaware, Lucas Davenport, etc- where the cat and mouse game can have dramatic impact. There are exceptions, but they only prove the rule.
Last but not least, there's the principle of shock: the whole point of Perry Mason shows was to reveal how "upstanding citizens" could descend into murder, given enough incentive. The suspect list for that show was usually stacked with "leading citizens" and other folks who had some kind of reputation to shield themselves from suspicion*. (Another strike against drug dealers and mobsters as prime suspects, as an aside.) Raymond Chandler toyed with this constantly- Orfamay Quest is a prime example- and the entire field of cozies is built on this, near as I can tell. The fact that businessmen figure so prominently as criminal suspects indicates, almost perversely, that they are among the few categories of folks for whom murder can remain a shocking contrast. Perry Mason used to pull out crooked cops as the height (depth?) of perfidy; on L&O, crooked cops and detectives are often just part of the terrain (a fact the links don't mention, at least that I noticed.) For writers who are supposedly turning a jaundiced eye toward the American populace, this is something of a condolence. But that's easy for me to say . . .
*Leonard Nimoy's appearance is an interesting exception. Not only did he play a lower class Brit, he beat up his girlfriend as well. Almost a unique circumstance in the Mason catalogue. I even think he ends up being the killer, but can't find any proof on-line.
Ex ignorantia ad sapientiam; e luce ad tenebras
I'd like to see some teevee about the other 5%. You know, the unemployed, the destitute and homeless. Stories about how because they've rejected Jesus as their Personal Savior, they're destined to live out their days shitting on the sidewalk and screaming obscenities at passers-by.
That would make for good patriotic teevee.
Great! More whining from our culture of victimhood. Maybe if they want to be portrayed differently on TV, they should start straightening out their own lives. As soon as anyone sees any differential outcome from different employment classes it becomes an excuse to give up and cry for a handout instead of pulling themselves up by their bootstraps.
It may not be very politically correct to say so, but businessmen only have themselves to blame.
Ya gotta know when to give 'er and when to shut 'er down -- Lester
TeeVee programs featuring rapacious, slimy businessmen -- we're talking about reality shows again!
An argument isn't merely nay-saying and contradictions! -- M. Python
Hola, GB!
As for your practices as a biznisman, at least you give your customers fair warning when you hand out shotgun shells as business cards. That's some serious caveat emptor!
An argument isn't merely nay-saying and contradictions! -- M. Python
