Adam Ruins Everything

Adam Ruins Everything is hosted by the decidedly unusual Adam Conover. Rather than cover that fact he revels in it, making himself the butt of many of the jokes on his social awkwardness, Whether he is like that in real life or not, it's highly entertaining and nice to see him not taking himself too seriously.

The show presents LOTS of facts in a quick and breezy, and most importantly, entertaining way so that the average viewer won't feel they are getting information overload or be bored. And as unusual as he is, Adam is an engaging host all the way. And this first season he has picked some great topics to cover: from airport security and charitable donations to summer break, nutrition (one of my fave eps), sex (another fave)to, inevitably, death. Are all the facts presented 100% accurate? Probably not, and Adam even admits that during one of the final episodes, but they do make you think while they amuse and that's important. Too often we take things as fact because they are the status quo, when we should be questioning them. Adam and the show do this for us and it opens up the discussion. Don't accept the way Hollywood or the government present things, do some checking on your own.

The connecting tissue of Adam tormenting various people by ruining stuff they like or took for granted, is hilarious, or in the final episode, downright scary. The supporting cast is a lot of fun and I hope to see Adam and crew back for a second season. Its been a long time since I've enjoyed a non-fiction TV show this much.

Those who complain on here that the facts presented on 'Adam Ruins Everything' are somehow biased in order to serve someone's narrow 'worldview' are themselves falling victim to the fallacy that any statement (even when backed up with credible sources) they see as running 'opposite' or 'counter' to their own opinions or perceptions must therefore be suggestive of a nefarious scheme to push some sort of agenda.

I've come to notice that the several posters who bothered to complain about the show's content seem to have internalized, as if it were a piece of their own personal identity, some of the wrongly-held misinformation that Adam Conover & his writing team are seeking to correct.

One genius basically told me in so many words that my reliance on historically credible facts, be they good or ugly, were 'biased' serving to support my proudly held leftist principles; and that though his points, while ahistorical, or just plain false, but which nonetheless influenced his 'conservative right-wing' worldview, were just as valid. As if facts had their own agendas...

While it's true I've always (somewhat cheekily) suspected reality to have a certain leftist bias, to see rightists argue themselves into logical dead-ends over and over again, while funny in a way, is still alarming.

This just goes to further proves the importance of shows like Adam Ruins Everything.

There are so many cons, misconceptions, and deceitful propaganda that hundreds of millions of people just accept as correct and truth.

This show is by far the greatest exploiter of these falsehoods. It simplifies the deception into ways which anyone can understand.

Many of these subjects are painfully HUGE problems with society that have become commonly accepted.

It's like a reworked version of Mythbusters, but instead of urban, cinematic, and legendary myths this show exposes major falsehoods of everyday life in which majority of humans don't even think to question.

Bottom line: Brilliant, incredibly informative, funny, and the only good show TruTV has ever broadcast.

Informative and entertaining, the production staff relies heavily on research and corrects mistakes when they occur. Overall great show.

Majority of negative reviews are from people who don't like facts that go against what they wanna believe. The truth is if these people truly cared about facts, all they would care about is they're facts. They wouldn't care if they came from a liberal or conservative source. Adam has admitted he has made mistakes but at least he lists sources. I've seen people who will send links to articles that either pre-date the new studies or they're from sources that don't list where they get their facts from. I'll take Adam's newer sources over sources that have no facts or are older than the newer sources.