Like Shark Tank, Undercover Boss manages to take ordinary business matters and bring out the inherent drama in them, with a strong emphasis on the human element in the proceedings. Shark Tank accepts the competitiveness—even at times the cut-throat competitiveness—of capitalism, and reveals its good side, including the fact that this competitiveness is what makes markets function. By contrast, Undercover Boss celebrates capitalism only in so far as its competitiveness is moderated by compassion, family feeling, and charitable impulses. Although the show should be praised for rejecting the kinds of caricatured presentations of capitalism offered so often in popular culture, it could do a better job of being true to the complexities of capitalism and seeing that what are regarded as its vices are actually its virtues. I suppose there is room for the Christmas bonus even in the most strictly capitalistic of businesses. But it is misleading to present the Christmas bonus as the fundamental principle of a well-run business. The premise of Undercover Boss tells a lot about the show. In each episode, the CEO must masquerade as something other than what he truly is. In a way, that is true of the whole show. Capitalism must not appear in all its dynamic, disruptive character, as it does in Shark Tank. It must put on the mask of the family, with all its Dickensian warmth and jollity, to earn its place in our hearts. As the more honest of the two shows, Shark Tank, I think, is preferable. But in the way they both work to rehabilitate the image of capitalism in the world today, they both make a valuable contribution to our popular culture.