Why are Rob and Amber on ‘All-Stars’?

Wondering about how a certain reality show pulled something off? Have a question about a certain contestant?

Whether it's "Survivor," "American Idol," "The Apprentice," "Real World" or another show, send in your questions. Gael Fashingbauer Cooper, MSNBC.com's Television Editor, and Andy Dehnart, creator of Reality Blurred, will try to answer them.

Before you send in your question, check our archives — you may be able to get your answer right away.

Q: I hope you can answer this one! Why are Rob and Amber back again on "Amazing Race All-Stars"? Hasn't their 15 minutes of fame ended 2 hours ago? There were so many memorable players like the hippies, the wrestlers, the circus clowns for instance. How were they selected?     —Aniiqa, Calgary

Andy says: I, too, wish their time on my television set was over. In a recap after the first episode, I wrote that when Rob is on the show, "I want to get in my car, set the cruise control to 70 mph, open the door, and dangle my face out so it can drag along the pavement and distract me from the pain I feel when I have to watch him." And that's not much of an exaggeration.

However, I understand why they're on the all-star season: because of people like me (who despise their presence) and people who love them (and despise people like me). Besides creating drama for fans, they also do so on the show, as we've already seen; Rob picked a fight with another team member at an airport just, he told us, to annoy the guy.

But is that kind of behavior "all-star" racing? Some nicer teams, including the hippies and winners Chip and Kim, have publicly discussed their disappointment about not being approached for the show. But Bertram van Munster, the executive producer and co-creator of "The Amazing Race," told USA TODAY that the teams were selected because "character-wise, they're all-stars in our book."

In other words, they're the most controversial, most engaging, or most annoying teams. We may hate Romber, but that's exactly the point.   

Gael says: I think I speak for a large contingent of fans when I say that I really wish Rob and Amber hadn't been chosen. There's a part of me that just thinks it isn't fair, that they've had their chances, over and over again, and there's another part that is plain sick of seeing their cocky gameplay.

But there's a part of me that says, even though I personally don't care for them as players, they're pretty excellent at the game, as witnessed by their track record coming in first at the pit stops so far. And who would I have put in their place? My favorite missing team is B.J. and Tyler, Team Hippie, and is it really fair for them to compete again when they already won the million? This could get into a huge argument about what's really fair, and should one expect reality shows to be fair, but really, the point is moot. As Andy points out, Rob and Amber are as close as reality-show teams get to "celebrities," so the show knows they'll help pull in ratings.

Q: Why doesn’t any couple from "The Bachelor" ever work out? Is it the timing? Or people not fully fully evaluated to determine the level of commitment? Wasn’t Lorenzo also seen out and about with other women in NY?   —Leanna, New Mexico

A: Andy says: On the surface, this question seems pretty easy to answer: It’s a reality show! Producers select suitors for drama first and compatibility second, and the couple meets with cameras and lights everywhere—never mind the other suitors who are competing for the bachelor or bachelorette’s attention. It’s a crazy scenario and one that doesn’t seem conducive to the formation of a life-long relationship.

But on second thought, a lot of healthy relationships are born in situations that are similarly weird, even if the circumstances are different. Having potential suitors screened and background-checked by a television network and its lawyers seems safer than meeting a stranger in a bar or online. And many things can affect a growing relationship, from societal pressure to the influence of family members, friends, and colleagues.

There is another factor: “Bachelor” couples have to stay apart after filming finishes and the show begins airing, so the outcome isn’t spoiled for viewers. That means that, immediately after meeting and (perhaps) falling in love, the couple is apart in the prime of their relationship. Then again, there are many long-distance relationships that survive and thrive, so why don’t these?

Thus, I’m not really sure why “Bachelor” don’t last. Maybe the show has the same track record as non-televised relationships, it’s just that we’re scrutinizing these more.   

MORE FROM REALITY TV

Reality TV Section Front

‘Dancing’ does time warp with themed dances Vote: Rate the ‘Dancing’ stars Jacksons reality series to premiere Dec. 13 Ousted ‘Survivor’ castaway never saw it coming Double elimination on ‘Project Runway’ White House to host ‘Iron Chef America’ Two more couples get the boot on ‘Dancing’ It was a bad night to be a tapper on ‘SYTYCD’ ‘Loser’: A player’s past choices come back to haunt her Television section Reality TV Section Front   Add Reality TV headlines to your news reader: