confession

bobman1235

I would argue that there's no benefit to it being fixed. If the show is about getting viewers, then the popular vote would determine which people the viewers most want to see, and therefore who would get the most ratings. And dont' give me the "recording contract" crap, because they're all under contract and any of them could be given a contract and be popular regardless of how the end up in the contest.

Also, any show where there's a prize involved is at least to some extent looked over by third parties to ensure that it's a "fair contest."

cindy100

Taylor Hicks? Shame on the voters! Yes, I too got sucked in to this show and although I do not vote, I kind of wish I had now.

Cindy

zombie boy 2000

cindy100 wrote:

Taylor Hicks? Shame on the voters! Yes, I too got sucked in to this show and although I do not vote, I kind of wish I had now.

Cindy

Sign of the times Cindy....
many sociologists argue that we currently exist in the Age of the Underdog (call it the Napolean Dynamite Era:D ). People are just fed up with seeing the stereotypical, cookie-cutter winners bring home the prize. That's why we've seen such a rise in popularity of the "anti-hero" in films, video-games, television shows, and other assorted media. Taylor, to an extent, embodied much of what American Idol stood against (namely, in the form of his age, looks, music selections, etc.) As such, he was rewarded for it.
Just my 2 cents

Early B.

bobman1235 wrote:

I would argue that there's no benefit to it being fixed.

Yeah, only if you believe that professional wrestlers actually wrestle.

There are significant benefits to AI being fixed. Let's face it, the producers choose the winners, period. That's their job. Everything else is a farce for entertainment purposes.
There's plenty of evidence of this -- just watch a couple of those behind the scenes shows where previous contestants talk candidly about their experiences and about what is contained in the AI contract that all contestants are required to sign.

The winner of the show is the one the producers feel will make them the most money in terms of TV ratings and marketability. The votes don't matter. Never did. In fact, even those shows with celebrity judges --their votes don't matter, either. Ultimately, the producers decide the winner.

Think of it this way -- if you produced a show, there's no way in hell you'd allow judges or voters (for AI, most of them are teenagers) to determine the outcome of your show. There's millions of dollars riding on this decision. Would you risk it on a popular vote? Hell, no.

The audience doesn't determine what music is played on the radio -- the producers do. The masses are not the architects of popular culture.

criverajr

You the man Earl. I feel the same way you think for one minute Taylor Hicks is an AI, no way, but he has a draw in a certain area which the producers of the show i.e Simon, think he can slip into and make them money. When has the winner of the show been someone Simon really liked. He is one of the producerss of the show and when he has ever said to a contestant you are a winner with-in 2 weeks that person is gone because he know the audience will vote against him not the contestant to make him look wink, wink, stupid. The fix is in plain and simple. Show me a TV contest and I'll show you something that can be fixed. Look at the dancing show in order to get you to come back they let one of the worst dancers win, it's all fixed. Let me say this their is no way they were going to let the big girl, the young girl, or the rocker win.

CRj-NON AI VOTER!!!!!!!

zombie boy 2000

Early B. wrote:

The audience doesn't determine what music is played on the radio -- the producers do. The masses are not the architects of popular culture.

You make some really, really good points. But there is a level of symbiosis at play here. Said "producers" cannot simply unleash the sounds of two cats mating in a rusty trash can, and expect the general populace to accept and like it. Their ears still have to be to the proverbial "ground".

bobman1235

Early B. wrote:

There are significant benefits to AI being fixed. Let's face it, the producers choose the winners, period. That's their job. Everything else is a farce for entertainment purposes.

That's a fair point, I'm just saying that isn't the popular vote in this case a good indication of what WILL attract the most audience? Most advertisers DREAM of being able to ask their audience "exactly what do you want?" So maybe I'm being "naive" (although I would argue you're being a bit conspiratorial), but I just don't see how the producers could think that the voting doesn't represent the desires of their audience. For example, TV shows aren't renewed or cancelled based on producer / executive whim, their success is based on RATINGS. Wouldn't voting on American Idol essentially be "ratings" for each contestant? Isn't your target market TELLING YOU EXPLICITLY who they care about and want to see, and who is most marketable?

bobman1235

criverajr wrote:

When has the winner of the show been someone Simon really liked. He is one of the producerss of the show and when he has ever said to a contestant you are a winner with-in 2 weeks that person is gone because he know the audience will vote against him not the contestant to make him look wink, wink, stupid. The fix is in plain and simple.

Last week, before the voting, Simon explicitly said to Taylor, "Congratulations, you just won American Idol". That goes completely counter to your nonsense argument.

Demiurge

The people most definitely do have to do with what music is played on the radio. Record labels won't release material that won't sell. They follow the trends and give the majority what it wants. The unfortunate thing is that the bulk of it has no soul, integrity, or value to my ears. All the more reason to support independant artists who cut the umbilical cord and go out on their own. Taking real risks and making real music.

American Idol is the bane of what is wrong with music, and MTV still carries that torch. It's all about a look or a particular style of music, not what is actually good. They leave nothing to be discovered and these people aren't idols. Hell, most of them don't even write their own songs.

It's still an entertaining show, but so, so wrong.

Early B.

zombie boy 2000 wrote:

You make some really, really good points. But there is a level of symbiosis at play here. Said "producers" cannot simply unleash the sounds of two cats mating in a rusty trash can, and expect the general populace to accept and like it. Their ears still have to be to the proverbial "ground".

Not true. Remember Milli Vanilli?:D

zombie boy 2000

One of the main problems with the current musical climate is that "alternative" and "modern" have been appropriated by the mainstream and commercial. Even "independent" has... think how much the Strokes were marketed in the mainsteam press under the "independent" label. Hell, it won't be long before Wal-Mart has an independent section. I believe Border's and Sam Goody's already do. So music as a tool of rebellion has been taken out of the hands of true fans -- spayed and neutered and handed back in the form of "number bands" Blink18241Sumwhatever" to "angst ridden" Hot Topic shoppers mad at mommy and daddy for not upping their allowance so they can fork over 30 clams for a chained wallet produced in quantities of millions to showcase the proud owners "uniqueness". It's a tired game... and it really looks like the marketing machine has the clear advantage. Music for music's sake is dying a slow, painful death.

zombie boy 2000

Early B. wrote:

Not true. Remember Milli Vanilli?:D

They sounded more like two hamsters in a Folger's can having their limbs simultaneously "extracted" with rusty pliers:D

Early B.

One good thing I can say about AI is that most of the winners (and the losers, too) actually have some singing ability compared to the mega stars out there now like Mary J. Blige and Alicia Keyes.

criverajr

No it just reassures it he already knew who was going to win so he needed the voters to get behind Kat to make it interesting. Time will tell on Taylor, but I bet he does ok in his field. Rating are about demographics not what the people are clamorinng to see. You have to disect the numbers of viewers as to who the show it targeting and what sponsers are buying time on the show which brings in the money, rating are numbers used in many different ways. Did you notice the accent on the auditor last night, sounded alot light like Simon, I wonder why? Pleeeeease. You want to buy a bridge? As far as music goes, why do you think rap has gotten so big, the music companys have found that young white america loves rap and keeps it alive, speak to any young black man trying to get ahead in rap, no matter how hard they try and sometimes achieve success, the distributors are 99% white so in fact the man always controls what goes out, that is not BS that is a fact. So no america does not always decide what it wants.

CRj

CRj

zombie boy 2000

You may have a point....
whoever is most willing to spend their disposable income decides what is popular. That's why senior citizens will never have much of a say in pop culture, while the 20-30 year old Male demogragphic will continue to be the most sought after and marketed to.

Danny Tse

I will still stand by my choice of Katherine as the better overall "package".

I don't doubt AI is fixed. In fact, I would be surprised if it isn't fixed. The bottom line to AI is to choose someone who can make the most money for the record companies and the producers of the show. They've seen all the "contestants" beforehand and they know who they'll pick as the "winner". Each week's show is merely a "soap opera" to milk advertising dollars.

If they can fix the Olympics or any of the beauty contests, they can fix AI.

It still sickens me that each week's "results" get reported as actually news on news reports.

opus

..nm

opus

nm. I can't believe I almost got sucked into a AI arguement:)