The actual meaning of "shill"

[mirrorimageegamirorrim]

I had never heard of this word until I saw "Phil the Shill" but I thought I understood its meaning from the context of the episode so I never bothered to look it up.  However, the other day, by happenstance, I came across a formal definition of the word and it doesn't mean exactly what I thought.  I assumed it just meant a swindler or scam artist but the definition is actually more precise.  Given what the word really means, It seems this title was chosen more for its rhyming qualities than it's relevance to the Phil character as revealed in the episode.  It sort of applies, but it's kind of squeezing a square peg through a round hole.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/shill       

[Sonny-Burnett]

Well he did pose as a sales/middle man to entice those Coke buyers into parting with their money, as the dictionary says "to decoy others into participating". 

 

[mirrorimageegamirorrim]

1 minute ago, Sonny-Burnett said:

Well he did pose as a sales/middle man to entice those Coke buyers into parting with their money, as the dictionary says "to decoy others into participating". 

 

True, but he wasn't working for someone else-- he was a self-employed scam artist. This is one reason why shill is not quite appropriate.  And he wasn't posing as a middleman, he was one.  He was also peddling in products he didn't possess-- just a garden variety swindler.  He wasn't a decoy for anything.  

[Matt5]

15 minutes ago, mirrorimageegamirorrim said:

True, but he wasn't working for someone else-- he was a self-employed scam artist. This is one reason why shill is not quite appropriate.  And he wasn't posing as a middleman, he was one.  He was also peddling in products he didn't possess-- just a garden variety swindler.  He wasn't a decoy for anything.  

Always wondered about "Shill" a great word worked particularly well with Phil!

[mirrorimageegamirorrim]

14 minutes ago, Matt5 said:

Always wondered about "Shill" a great word worked particularly well with Phil!

It worked as far as it created a catchy episode title.  But, according to the dictionary, we never see Phil actually shilling.

[Dadrian]

2 hours ago, mirrorimageegamirorrim said:

It worked as far as it created a catchy episode title.  But, according to the dictionary, we never see Phil actually shilling.

Just shtealing. 

[Sonny-Burnett]

2 hours ago, mirrorimageegamirorrim said:

True, but he wasn't working for someone else-- he was a self-employed scam artist. This is one reason why shill is not quite appropriate.  And he wasn't posing as a middleman, he was one.  He was also peddling in products he didn't possess-- just a garden variety swindler.  He wasn't a decoy for anything.  

Did a little homework on this so I'll play Devil's advocate with you.  I think my example was not the definitive one intended by the title but rather was focused on the opening scene..

In the Vice Wikia( http://miamivice.wikia.com/wiki/Phil_the_Shill)  for this episode it says " A "shill" is a person who is secretly in league with another person or organization while pretending to be neutral, usually for financial gain"  So in this instance they are likely referring to Phil's relationship with his plant Joe who is in league with Phil in the game show scam. Phil is pretending to be neutral.  From Mirriam Webster shill is  "one who makes a sales pitch or serves as a promoter" which again would reinforce the role as game show promoter and host. 

As to the ending scenes with the 3 coke buyers, from memory I thought Phil was pretending to be a guy with big drug connections and was a customer of said connections, but needed their cash to close the deal. So there he is holding himself out as a customer or connection (though yes I realize he actually wasn't) to these 3 loons. so in that respect posing as a customer (to  a fictitious seller) and as a friend to Sara whom these 3 people already know. So here  the definition of shill in dictionary,com may fit: "a person who poses as a customer in order to decoy others into participating, as at a gambling house, auction, confidence game, etc"  And from Oxford Dictionaries "A person who pretends to give an impartial endorsement of something in which they themselves have an interest." Again this is similar to Phil pretending to be a customer/endorser of the fictitious seller to the 3 chuckle head buyers who were comfortable enough with him to hand over their money. He decoyed them (meaning making them wait at his house when I think they wanted to meet the seller)  into buying based on his false representations to them. 

In any case I guess it isn't a clear cut fit in the literals sense of the word SHILL , but I suspect the writers had the opening sequence in mind when coming up with the title. I think in the strict use of the word Shill from what i read Phil should be working for someone else, and he is not. 

[mirrorimageegamirorrim]

Great reply, pal!  I considered the game show angle when trying to find a way that the word shill could be used appropriately used to refer to Phil.  However, it seemed to me that if either one of the men could be construed as a shill it would be Joe, not Phil.  But really, if you stick to the definition of the word, neither man was working as a shill.  In addition, to call either man a sales pitcher or promoter is stretching the words as they would apply here and not appropriate to the context.  They were scamming, no doubt, but not shilling.  The definition cited from Mirriam Webster available online is actually skeletal to the point of being misleading; it doesn't tell you the whole story.  If you consider the definitions of the word from all available sources, as an aggregate, to be a shill there needs to be an element of one person who is planted somewhere, actively working for another, pretending to be an authentic, enthusiastic customer in order to encourage other people to buy in to a product/service/idea being sold.  All shills are scam artists and swindlers but not swindlers and scam artists are shills.  This word is great because it has such a precise meaning.  

Regarding the coke deal at the end, Phil was coerced by Rivers into acting as the middle man between Rivers's organization and the buyers.  When Phil originally propositioned the buyers at his house, he simply lied to them about what he could deliver.  There were none of the required elements though that would constitute shilling in this so-called deal.  They didn't even need any convincing to buy (the very heart of shilling)-- they were already looking to buy.  He just took advantage of their gullibility.  And while at this time he did try to scam them by offering them coke he didn't have, for much cheaper than they could get anyplace else, he truly wasn't scamming in the final deal.  He was the actual middle man in a legit deal to try to save his own skin.  He did pull one final "scam" at the end when he absconded with the money, but that just makes him a thief.  

To characterize Phil as a customer or decoy is to force a square peg through a round hole.  You can make a case, as you have done, but it doesn't square nicely.  He's in the same ballpark but, as far as we are allowed to see in the episode, he never really meets the requirements of a shill.  I do think it's a great title from one of my favorite episodes from my favorite season.  But I think it was chosen more because it sounds cool rather than because of it's descriptive nature.  In other words I think the meaning is close enough that it works with the episode and I have no real problem with it. I'm just a word person and topics like this interest me.              

[timm525]

So,...... apparently I need reading glasses as I misread the title as saying "The actual meaning of Shi*". 

Which stands for "Ship High In Transit" or so the story goes on the internet which is more likely bullshi*. 

Click -----> here

I always heard of Shill as a swindler and or someone that works for someone else as a false player.

[Dadrian]

Good thing his name wasn’t Phit! 

[airtommy]

You're right, the word isn't quite correct for this character.  I think this title has subconsciously bothered me for years, but until you started this thread I didn't realize why. 

One example of shilling is if you sell an item on eBay and make a second account and start bidding the price up.  That's against their rules and is called "shill bidding".

[pahonu]

Interesting topic guys!  Assuming Phil wasn't providing the funding for the Rat Race game show which seems highly unlikely, as the show host, he was publicly acting as a neutral party while privately rigging the game in his favor.  This seems to fit the basic definition of shill.  It would be more clear if we knew where the prize money was coming from and if that source was complicit as well.  It's not made known that anyone beyond Phil and Joe benefitted from the arrangement, though.

 

[mirrorimageegamirorrim]

On 4/14/2018 at 3:49 PM, pahonu said:

Interesting topic guys!  Assuming Phil wasn't providing the funding for the Rat Race game show which seems highly unlikely, as the show host, he was publicly acting as a neutral party while privately rigging the game in his favor.  This seems to fit the basic definition of shill.  It would be more clear if we knew where the prize money was coming from and if that source was complicit as well.  It's not made known that anyone beyond Phil and Joe benefitted from the arrangement, though.

 

Good points.  However, as you implied, there are way too many unknowns.  And I take a little different view as far as publicly acting as a neutral party (an honest host) while privately rigging the game in his favor would make him a shill.  To be a shill means something very specific.  All we observe is a scam artist who rigged a game show in his favor.  If you want to use the game show as the justification for the episode title (which would itself be a bit misleading since it's such a small part of the episode and only one of several other "non-shilling" scams we learn about as the episode unfolds) then this would imply that Phil was planted in the game show by someone else, as a neutral party, to pretend to be someone who is overtly supportive of said game show and whose job is to drum up enthusiasm for the game show.  But how can a show's host be perceived as a neutral party by an outside observer?  Also, strictly speaking, a shill in his capacity as such does not have personal monetary gain as his immediate objective the way a swindler does (though it obviously must factor in at some point).  A shill's goal, by definition, is to create buzz around a particular product or concept so as to draw the attention of others to ultimately produce (monetary) gain for another party.  All Phil cares about is $$$$$$$$$.  We never see him doing the work that would characterize a shill.  Rather, he is just a con artist.  This is the best characterization of Phil given the multiple scams we observe in the episode.          

      

Edited April 16, 2018 by mirrorimageegamirorrim