Archive through April 24, 2003
MoveCloseDeleteAdmin

TV ClubHouse: Archive: American Idol (FOX): Miscellaneous Gossip (ARCHIVE): Archives: Archive through April 24, 2003

Hermione69

Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 06:11 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
It just occurred to me... maybe they sized on the PETA ads to get rid of Vanessa purely to even out the male/female ratio discrepancy that happened with Corey Clark's disqualification. You know they love pairing them up. Seems kinda petty, but this is Fox, after all!

Essence

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 04:50 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I'm putting this here because I don't think it's fair to have this discussion in Kimberly's fan club folder, where the topic originated...

I want to know why people think telephone campaigning is cheating and unfair?

As Ladytex pointed out I've seen people soliciting phone calls for their favorites on this board, as well as many others. Whats the difference?

How do we know that other contestants don't have the same type of support? I'm not going to pick on any one contestant, but there have been some iffy outcomes to me this season...you best belief someone has been campaigning calls for those people as well.

And to equate this to BB1 is unfair IMHO because those calls were against someone else. They were calling in to get rid of Brittany, these people are calling in for their favorites.

Pagal

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 05:44 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Well said Essence. I totally agree with you.

Hermione69

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 06:15 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I agree, Essence. I don't think it is unfair either. In addition, all they are really doing is providing a common location so to suggest it is not fair is silly to me. These people could just as easily call for 2 hours from home and the same numbers would come in. If they were providing power dialing opportunities, that would be another thing altogether. Remember that from last season?

I'm sure the other contestants have support groups just like this. Clay's YMCA, for example, may be having voting parties for all we know. Just because it hasn't been reported, doesn't mean it isn't happening. I personally think it is a cool way to get together, show support, and celebrate someone you are really rooting for.

Hobbs

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 06:32 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Essence, I think it has a lot to do with BB1. Everyone was shocked at the time because nobody had thought of it before. Everyone looked at it like it was cheating. Especially us Britney fans. It kinda whacked us all up-side the head like Julie Chen to Marcellas. It now has the connotation of cheating and probably always will. I personally don't think it is wrong. What's the difference between everyone sitting at their homes hitting redial, or getting together as a group.

As for solicting calls, I think all that does is make people watch and make up their own minds. If you knew nothing about the show, and someone came to you and asked you to vote for X, you'd go and watch the show. If you thought Y was better, you'd probably vote for Y.

As for power (automatic computer generated) dialing. I don't like that.

Hermione69

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 06:47 am EditMoveDeleteIP
This goes right in to what we are discussing. It is from:

http://www.realitynewsonline.com

"I received two e-mails indicating that the TV station in Memphis, Trenyce's hometown, made a big push for votes on her behalf. One person relayed a post from a message board to me (sorry, I don't know which board):

Not only is there a piece on Trenyce on the Memphis news after every "Idol" broadcast, but now for the two hours following "Idol", there is a commercial during every break urging people to vote for Trenyce and showing the number to call NOW! Last night on the news, they really laid it on thick saying that Trenyce was in real jeopardy of being cut from the show if we didn't act NOW!!!! to save her.

Wow. Yes, I can see how that would help her vote totals! Later, I got another e-mail. This one noted:

Sorry to prove you wrong. The citizens of Memphis, Tennessee are behind Trencye. She does have a big fan base and we're out to prove it. We proved it tonight. Our T.V. stations are promoting her and her call in telephone number all night.

This supports what was said in that other message board post. It does indeed appear that Trenyce is getting an extra push from the hometown crowd. I'm not going to discuss now whether that's a good thing or a bad thing (I addressed similar topics in my article on the mind of the voter), but in this case I think it ended up with the correct results."


I'm sure they ALL have people campaigning to give them an extra push in votes.

Llkoolaid

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 07:15 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I can see where it would be a fun thing and I don't think it is cheating but I don't think we get the real results because of it.

Like I said in the Kim thread, one vote per number and then locked out. That way you could give both Clay and Ruben or who ever you liked one vote but you couldn't give anyone more than one vote.

Lori

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 07:25 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I agree Llkoolaid!

I agree that "one vote" per household would certainly garner a fairer result.

The toll free telephone numbers are the big thing. If people were paying for their calls I can guarantee you most everyone would only vote once, or not at all, if it came out of their own pocket book!

Hobbs

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 07:54 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I don't like the fact that people that have never watched the show are voting because some commercial or newscaster tells them to call a number. It's one thing to watch the show and be a fan and support your favorite, but to blindly follow is just ignorant. If I had the money, I would run an ad that would intentionally give out the wrong number. I think that is just as fair.

I hope AI figures out a fix before next season.

Hobbs

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 07:59 am EditMoveDeleteIP
LL, does that mean one vote per household? What if I like Clay and my wife likes Ruben. We can only vote for one? Nope. Doesn't work. It needs to be one vote per person, but how do you do that? And then campaining through ads and newscasts will sway the vote anyway.

I don't think there's a fix.

Hermione69

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 08:00 am EditMoveDeleteIP
But at the same time, the one vote per person or household may not be that accurate either. It wouldn't demonstrate who would still be a big hit even if they didn't win. Many of us really like more than one person. The way the voting is now gives the executives a better idea about who is very well-liked, even if not in the number one spot. They can then make a better decision about whether the contestant will continue to have a following after the show is over. If the contestant inspires the kind of passion in people that they will vote for two hours, they are more likely to continue following the person's career and support them after Idol is over and done. I think there are pros and cons to any system. I think this works pretty accurately in the end, even if the exact order of departure leaves something to be desired for many people.

Crazydog

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 08:11 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I think the only thing that is unfair is when you have someone using computers to automatically log in thousands of votes. I remember reading that this happened last year for Nikki even though the producers said that the votes were negligible to the results.

I don't see anything wrong with asking others to vote - of course people from Memphis want to see Trenyce do well. The local Fox channel wants Trenyce to stay in the competition to keep more people interested in seeing someone from Memphis on the show so they will keep promoting her.

If I were to reform the voting system I would somehow give the judges' input more weight. This week, America's bottom three matched the judge's bottom three, but this has rarely happened. I think the only people who should be up for elimination should be determined by the judges secretly.

America votes for who to eliminate, not knowing exactly who is vulnerable. At the start of the elimination show, the three who have been selected as the worst by the judges are revealed. Then the votes are revealed.

Hobbs

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 08:17 am EditMoveDeleteIP
What if after the performance show, the judges pick the bottom 3 based on that nights and only that nights performance and we (the public) vote on those 3 only. I think I like that.

Llkoolaid

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 08:26 am EditMoveDeleteIP
No what I am saying is one vote per household for each number. You could vote for each person 1 time. That way you could get a vote and your husband could make another one if he didn't like the one you chose or you could give a vote to each of the ones you thought still belonged there.

Hermione69

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 08:27 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Hobbs, then Kimberly Locke may have been gone round 1 of the finals. And look where she is now!

Hobbs

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 08:27 am EditMoveDeleteIP
But Hermi has it right. In the end it all works out. Kelly has a #1 album. Tamyra is on Boston Public and has an album coming out which I'm sure will do great. And Nicky is still doing Kareoke.

Llkoolaid

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 08:35 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Actually I agree with Crazydog, the automated dialing is the only thing I have a real problem with. That is cheating in my book.

If I was given a chance to change 1 thing It would be to give the judges more control. But instead of picking the bottom 3 and singling them out I might instead give the top performers immunity for their performance that night. The number getting immunity would change with the number of contestants left. Everyone else is on the block with 1 vote per household to each person you want to save. I think that would cover it pretty well.

Hobbs

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 08:50 am EditMoveDeleteIP
But couldnt it be said that Clay and Ruben have had immunity all along?

Hobbs

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 08:51 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I'm sorry. I'm just in a p*ssy mood today.

Beachcomber88

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 09:19 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Anytime there's a contest-based reality show, there's always going to be problems with voting if it's left in the hands of the viewing public. As we all know, the Tamyra-Nikki disaster is one of the greatest travesties in the short history of reality tv voting. And how many times have you wanted to throw something at the tv when the BB results were announced?

But the thing to remember is that whatever happens is supposedly America's choice. In this respect, I don't see anything wrong with campaigning for votes. That's the whole basis for our presidential election. But like others, I don't agree with the computer voting hijinks. Perhaps it would be better to institute a lockout system after a certain number of votes, say five, were recorded from a single phone number.

I like Crazydog's idea about giving the judges more control, but then is this really the people's choice? Or is it the people's choice amongst the judges favorites?

Just goes to show that any type of contest where talent is evaluated is always going to be subjective. Absolutely no way around it. Let's just hope that there's no French ice skating judges amongst us.

Llkoolaid

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 09:48 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Amen Beachcomber, can't trust those skating judges.

I guess you are right it is always going to be subjective but it is fun thinking of other ideas.

Seamonkey

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 10:10 am EditMoveDeleteIP
The "scandal" of Big Brother was that people had to PAY for the calls and the idea that someone was funding mass calling was problemmatic.

Here we have free calls, and people are free to call and call and call.. power dialing seems unfair.

It would be nice if the people voting actually heard them sing :)

And I wish Kim had a church or some organization pulling for her.

Grooch

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 10:23 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I have no problem with something like Ruben's church getting together and calling for 2 hours. And I doubt AI cares either. The more a hometown pulls together and gets behind a contestant, that's more viewers AI has and more buzz it is generating for next season.

What I find sad is when a hometown doesn't get behind a contestant. Weeks ago, when I searched for newspaper articles on the constestants, there was no problem finding any about Clay, Ruben, Carmen and Trenyce. Their hometowns are supporting them. I was only able to find one for Rickey and it was only after he was booted off. I haven't found any for Kim L. I don't think I ever saw any for Kim C. either. Josh is a marine, so he already has a huge call in base right there. I just wonder why their hometowns don't get more involved.

With the exception of Kim L., the ones remaining have been the ones getting the most support fom home.

Wcv63

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 11:34 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I agree that campaigning or getting together to root for and/or vote for a contestant is well within the paramenters of fairness. The way the votes are set up now does reflect how a contestant is being received by the public. For instance, a person who devotes themselves to voting over and over for a particular contestant is more likely to buy that contestant's CD. Those that watch but don't vote are less likely to support a CD.

If this were just about talent or marketability then America wouldn't have to be involved. It's about appeal and creating a staunch and loyal fanbase.

Texannie

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - 11:44 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Great point, Wcv63!!!!!