URL: http://community.realitytvworld.com/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/rtvw2/community/dcboard.cgi
Forum: DCForumID44
Thread Number: 2308
[ Go back to previous page ]
Original Message
"they could avoid the Sanjaya phenomenon"
Posted by thesoupgoddess on 04-20-07 at 07:46 PM
Want to join my crusade? If "Idol" hopes to regain (or maybe gain) their reputation as a legitimate talent show, they could foil the auto dialers. All they have to do is have everyone dial into the same phone number (or even multiple numbers) and then vote. You know, after you are connected, then you do the voting.

Not only would it foil the auto-dialers, it would be more accurate. The way it is now, the number for the person getting the most votes is also going to be getting the most busy signals. In fact, I don't see how a winner immerges at all the way it is set up now - basically, all the lines are limited, and probably get nearly the same number of votes.

Table of contents
Messages in this discussion
"RE: they could avoid the Sanjaya phenomenon"
Posted by Fishercat on 04-20-07 at 09:00 PM
LAST EDITED ON 04-20-07 AT 09:01 PM (EST)

A few problems there

Vote totals plummet due to having the comprehend two steps equalling less ability to brag about voting numbers

They'll need several numbers to call to keep up with the crowds as lines get jammed as is with one step

Morons who can't follow two steps won't under stand when their vote for contestant number 10 was taken as contestant number 1, and then they will cause a stink

Additionally, you have to figure somebody would make a program capable of pushing two more numbers after a three second delay.

P.S. They could have avoided the Sanjaya phenomenon by not putting Sanjaya on the show

"RE: they could avoid the Sanjaya phenomenon"
Posted by YankeeDixieDoodle on 04-23-07 at 02:53 PM
>
>P.S. They could have avoided the
>Sanjaya phenomenon by not putting
>Sanjaya on the show.

Absolutely! Send the 168 best auditioners to Hollywood. Then, send the 144 less talented ones home. Keeping only the best for the top 24. Or, AI will never be a true singing competition.

"RE: they could avoid the Sanjaya phenomenon"
Posted by Snidget on 04-20-07 at 09:05 PM
Certainly with the number of people that apply they could actually put up 24 people who could sing AND perform on stage. Part of why VFTW and others got going is it is obvious that they put the bad singers/performers in there purposefully. If they don't want America to vote for bad singers/bad performers, Do.Not.Put.Them.Through.

Fixing the voting however they choose to fix it does nothing if they don't have decent talent to start with, IMO.

Besides, they are too addicted to the high vote totals. I also think that for driving ratings (which is more important, again IMO, to them that getting someone that can have a real career) the way the vote now is done works really well.

They seem to have upped the capacity this year, the amount of busy signals seems way down from last year, but if they want to have even higher vote totals, you gotta have ever increasing capacity.


Thanks to Scarlett O Hara for the memorial sig pic.

"RE: they could avoid the Sanjaya phenomenon"
Posted by Fishercat on 04-20-07 at 09:14 PM
Jinx.

But yeah, I forgot to mention that there are far less busy signals this year. I think this week was the first in which Dialidol was spot on in order, even without MOE. That's probably a signal of more centralized voting.

And I agree that they put in people they consider cannon fodder or who appeal to (supposedly) very narrow groups. For instance, did anyone think Amy Krebs, Nicole Tranquillo, or even Leslie Hunt had a shot in hell at making Top 10? How about Jared Cotter, Paul Kim, and A.J. Tabaldo? All six were pretty much fodder so if a Lakisha or Chris Richardson had a bad performance, they could still skate by.

The problem with that is that, once in a while, that kind of fodder catches fire with voters. Usually it'll get them to Top 10 or 8 (like Haley and Sanjaya this year).

Then there's quasi-fodder, meaning people who the judges know can't or shouldn't win, but who will be solid competition to make it legit for a true winner. That backfired horribly last year when Taylor won, and I think Lakisha and Scott Savol and Anthony Federov fell into that category.

"They don't count..."
Posted by curveball on 04-23-07 at 01:17 PM
If you read the fine print at the end of the show you will see that the producers reserve the right to not count votes determined to have been made by auto-dialers. (or something like that). I was watching a taped version of last show, and at the end of the show it stopped on the small print, so I read it.

I don't know if this message has always been there or not, but it was last week.

I also don't know how they can tell the difference (betw auto dialer and 12-year-old), but obviously they can.

"RE: they could avoid the Sanjaya phenomenon"
Posted by Queene1979 on 04-23-07 at 02:47 PM
I think they should adopt a Dancing With The Stars voting system where the judges votes count for half and the votes are limited per phone line, I think this helps to weed out the bad dancers on the show and it could help weed out the bad singers in the show as well.