Results so far:
| Hurt | 50% | 26 votes | Total: 52 votes | |
| Helped | 50% | 26 votes |
I have been an avid fan of American Idol for years. I truly believed it was the biggest stepping stone to launching someone into their dream career. I realise now that this is what the producers of the show simply want us to believe, and the reality is very different.
My suspicions about the shows authenticity were raised when I read the disclaimer at the end of the show which says that if the producers suspect auto dialling then votes will be adjusted for whichever Idol it involved. [Paraphrase]. That suggested to me that at the end of the day the producers would have the final say in who stays and who goes.
Then I discovered Votefortheworst.com. At first I was angry that the site was promoting the worst Idol and encouraging people to vote for them. I really couldn't take Sanjaya's hair and lack of singing talent for much longer, but then I began to read further and discover that what the site was actually doing was giving us the 'truth' about how fake the show actually is.
Certainly all their information on the last season's contestants was verified and shockingly accurate. No longer were we watching unknown's instead they were almost all 'I've tried and failed, so here I am to try again'. This was the producer's attempts at reviving the show. All it did was push the reputation of the show further down. It has lost all integrity as a brand.
So why has this website hurt American Idol? Quite simple because it's revealed the show to be a sham. The Idol franchise was built, as the spin tells us, on making a new pop star from an unknown. We discover now that we've been fed a line all these years. The producers have decided in advance who will be in the top 12, and even have a disclaimer that would enable them to decide the winner. Who would have thought that David Cook would win, and David Archuletta be left on the sidelines? Maybe the producers had enough of David Archuletta's father and really didn't want to be working with him anymore, not to mention the cost to the show caused by his interference in one of David's songs.
I'm in no way opposing Vote for the worst, I believe they have done a great service in exposing American Idol to be a sham. The site has hurt the show in the sense that in order to validate it's reputation once more, American Idol must review many of its production decisions. Without that review many viewers will switch off, no one likes to be conned.
Learn more about this author, Donna Walser.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Vote for the Worst American Idol has Helped
Negative publicity is still publicity! I understand why the "Vote for the Worst American Idol" website was created. It was incredulous that William Hung or Sanjaya could get as many votes as they did. But the more unbelievable it was, the more people watched the show. It stirred up controversy and there is nothing better than a little controversy to keep up the ratings. People would have to tune in every week to see if that terrible contestant was actually going to make it another week, or if you were one of thousands who actually voted for that awful singer, well, then yes you would have to tune in also to see if it worked. Obviously, none of the candidates for worst ever won the show in the end but I'm sure it helped ratings and the number of votes that came in, which helped make money in advertising. Isn't that what it's all about? In that respect it definitely helped.
The other side of the debate was that the show was fake and "the worst" website showed American Idol to be a sham. I don't agree. One of the rules was that the contestants could not currently be signed to a record label. It never said they could never have in the past. Also, I don't know where it is written that the contestants have to be a "complete" unknown. Yes, some of the contestants had previously made records that perhaps didn't jump start their career and they found this opportunity to get in front of America and show what they had. Remember, you were still supposed to have talent to become the American Idol.
There has been some phenomenal talent that has been introduced to the world via this show. What would be the benefit to the producers deciding in advance who was to win? It is said that those who do not win are usually better off because they do not have the contract constraints, etc. that winning American Idol puts them under. Look at some of the "losers". There is Chris Daughtery, Clay Aiken, Kimberley Locke, Bo Bice, Kellie Pickler. Diana DeGarmo is performing on Broadway and we all know of the phenomenal talent of Jennifer Hudson that won her a best supporting actress for DreamGirls. None of these singers won American Idol but they certainly got their exposure to the world and their start up the ladder of success because of it.
The fact that the website encouraging all of us to vote for the worst American Idol was so popular, again, in my opinion, only helped to give more publicity to the show. More publicity, more of an audience, more votes, whether for the best or the worst made more money for the show. But, I think it's a great show. I think it brings great talent to the forefront. Whether the contestant of your choice wins or not, there is some great new talent out there for all of us after 7 years of being on the air and "the worst American idol" has only helped to sustain its popularity.
Learn more about this author, Marilyn Dunn.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.