Tonight's show marked a new low for the series, one in which rabid fanaticism won out over sheer talent. I don't know who the morons who voted for John Stevens and Camile Velasco last night were, and its a good thing, too. I must have been watching a different show than the rest of America last night, because I saw John stumble through the worst version of My Girl I've ever heard and Camile perform a rendition of For Once in My Life straight out of the karaoke bar from hell.
What the hell were the voters thinking? Putting Jennifer Hudson in the bottom three was reasonable, but LaToya London? Amy Adams?
Has anyone been watching this show? Amy has been the most consistent performer out of the finalists, hitting just the right tone for every genre of music so far and making each song her own. She did not deserve to be the first finalist put in the bottom three tonight.
Camille Velasco did. Who was it that voted for her? Whoever did, it could not have been on the strength of her performance. What's her target demographic? Who the hell does this untalented harpy appeal to?
Jennifer was the second finalist to get booted over to the loser's circle, but she didn't seem too worried about it as she danced her way across the stage. The competition is getting fierce, and its bringing out her weakness rather than her strength. She was one of my picks for the bottom three as well.
With Jennifer and Amy in the hot seats, it then came down to John Stevens and LaToya London. LaToya knew there was no way John could beat her, and it showed. John knew his departure was eminent and seemed resigned to it. When Seacrest announced that Miss London was in the bottom three, the entire audience gasped. My guess is the thirty-million-strong TV audience did, too. John looked shocked, then shameful. He knows LaToya is a much better singer. For her part, LaToya took the snub gracefully and joined her compatriots for the final decision.
Article comments
1 - Eric Olsen
Holy shit, man, you got this exactly right. I about spit my prune juice out my nose when the three lowest vote getters were LaToya (!!!!), Jennifer and Amy. What in God's name were these loons thinking when they regarded Jon's butchering of "My Girl" and Camile's continued sub-average warbling above these three? It seems like at least once a season the voters collectively go insane.
2 - Pappy
You obviously do not understand how Idol voting works...
Did it ever occur to anyone besides myself that there is a HUGE difference between voting people off and voting to keep people on?
If Idol voting had been to vote off the person you want off, it would have been a Camille vs. Jon Stevens slugfest.
BUT since you vote for you want on, if someone has a bad night + a large fan base, those fans are inspired to vote. Further the top people's fans are always inspired to vote. That left Amy Adams, good but with a small voting fan base, out of the loop.
FOX does the vote who you want to stay on purposely. They find it more interestingly because you honestly have no idea who will get the LEAST amount of votes (NOT VOTED OFF since you don't vote negatively).
Of course it makes more sense to let fans vote people off, but this is how FOX gets ratings. They use game theory to their advantage.
3 - IdolFan
I've read posts here that John Stevens, Camile and JP Lewis are the real bottom three. I couldn't agree more and last night was an incredible shock.
I remember during the first season, there were complaints that some voters were using speed dial or those machines that dial repeatedly, to give thousands of votes to their fav contestants. Does anybody know how they resolved that?
There could be one nut in Idaho somewhere who loves John Stevens and is using a machine to give him thousands upon thousands of votes. Is this possible? If so, doesn't it negate the whole concept of America's choice, moreso than judge/exec manipulation?
4 - Pappy
IdolFan: how can it be a shock consider you vote for you want to stay on, rather than voting for who you want off. Please read my post directly above yours and my posts in the most recent discussion of this week's AI.
5 - Pappy
IdolFan: how can it be a shock considering you vote for you want to stay on, rather than voting for who you want off. Please read my post directly above yours and my posts in the most recent discussion of this week's AI.
6 - IdolFan
I did read your post and it doesn't make sense.
If I vote for who I want OFF (assuming I am the only vote), and I vote for John Stevens, then he goes home. If I vote for who I want ON, and I vote for Fantasia (the best, no matter what manipulation I am subject to), then John Stevens still goes home. Either way that I vote, John Stevens SHOULD GO HOME. Instead, this show's voting process is clearly rigged by Kathleen Harris and Antonin Scalia.
7 - Pappy
You just don't get it buddy.
This isn't about one persons votes, it's about millions.
Fantasia is considered the star and has a fan base, so she gets tons of votes from her fan base.
John Stevens and Camille did bad, so their fans rally and vote like CRAZY to save them from being eliminated.
Amy Adams, with a smaller fan base than Fantasia, and perhaps the lack of diehard fanatics, is SOL because her fans incorrectly think "no matter what, Camille or John is off, so why bother voting?" Thus Amy loses out on votes and is out.
In fact this has happened every season. Last season, people were shocked to see one finals episode with Ruben in the bottom 2. Too many of his fans didn't vote because they "knew" he wasn't off, so why bother even voting?
This is ALSO how Nikki survived in AI season 1 for a long time. Her fans rallied to save her, and the people who got dropped, like the season 1 "shocker" of Tamayra, had too many fans who figured they didn't have to vote: after all, Nikki was the worst of a given week, she is bound to lose.
------------------------------
This is very simple. What don't you get about this?
NOW, if voting last week was to get rid of someone:
NOW EVERYONE VOTES. Those Amy Adams fans who didn't think they need to vote, go out and case a vote against Camille or John.
Ditto that for Fantasia fans, JP Lewis fans, Latoya fans, etc. etc. NOW Camille fans and Jon Fans cannot overcome the fans of every other contestant united to either get rid of Camille or John.
Then Camille and John would have been the bottom 2, with one of them gone.
------------------------------------
The problem is, people assume that voting people to stay is the same as voting someone off. IT'S SIMPLY NOT TRUE. That is why the media gets mad and claims foul play: They think, subconsciously, that America didn't like Amy Adams, which again, IS NOT TRUE. It's simple game theory: Imagine if on each week of survivor, you voted who should stay in the game. Least amount of votes goes home. THE OUTCOME WOULD BE DIFFERENT than it is now, where you cast a vote against someone, most votes goes home.
When you cast a positive vote for Fantasia, it does NOTHING towards Camille and John.
When you cast a negative vote against Camille, you helping to seal her coffin.
8 - Eric Olsen
Pappy's voting theory makes sense - people do have to feel motivated to make the vote and the voters do get complacent, and a bad performance can rally fans who know their fave sucked hosewater but don't want to see them go anyway.
Now his musical theory on the other hand...
9 - Pappy
Basically to sum it up for the simple (and perhaps closed) minded:
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN:
1.) The least popular person in a popularity contest
and
2.) The most hated person in a popularity contest.
Least popular = the person with the least amount of positive votes
Most hated = the person with the largest amount of negative votes
Thus while Camille and John are the most hated from last week, since the we are voting the least popular off and not the most hated, we end up with Amy Adams.
If you don't like it, tell FOX to let us vote for who we want off instead of who should be kept on. FOX will never listen because these crazy arguments drive ratings.
10 - Pappy
Basically to sum it up for the simple (and perhaps closed) minded:
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN:
1.) The least popular person in a popularity contest
and
2.) The most hated person in a "Who do we hate the most?" contest
Least popular = the person with the least amount of positive votes
Most hated = the person with the largest amount of negative votes
Thus while Camille and John are the most hated from last week, since the we are voting the least popular off and not the most hated, we end up with Amy Adams.
If you don't like it, tell FOX to let us vote for who we want off instead of who should be kept on. FOX will never listen because these crazy arguments drive ratings.
11 - Mac Diva
I don't buy Pappy's effusions, Eric. The motivation for voting some contestants to stay on can well be that one wants other contestants off. So, a vote to keep Cam on is a preference that John hit the road, Jack.
I also don't believe that some contestants are favored by the show over others. AI's producers mainly want to keep the program alive and successful, Their goal is to do whatever will result in that occurring.
As for fan bases, as I said in my entry about the racism directed toward African-Americans on the message boards, it appears black contestants, particularly leaders, have a built-in base of people who hate them for being on the show at all. That must negate their fan bases, to an extent. For example, considering the opinions Pappy has expressed on other AI threads, I don't find it hard to imagine him speed dialing the number to vote for Jon, Amy or any white performer over and over again.
There may be a good statistical analysis point to be made about the process, but Pappy is not the person to make it.
12 - IdolFan
I don't buy Pappy's theory either. While it does sound like it has some merit, I don't think it would apply consistently. I also don't think that judge/exec manipulation affects everybody, only the dumbest (i.e. a few million people). The judges can praise or ridicule person A, all they want, but if I like person A's voice, then I am not swayed by the judges. I think most Americans have enough intelligence to see that. It's not that I'm close minded or simple minded. I just don't think this theory works.
13 - Pappy
My final comment on this:
Every viewer of AI in America watches the Tuesday program, and while watching that program, they think about who should be off the show. They see horrid performances and think those people should be off the show.
However, FOX sets it up so that your thinking does not match the vote you cast. As you watch the show, you keep saying "John/Camille should be 'voted off'." But since you vote you want to stay on, you are not voting anyone off.
FOX could very well change it so that we get to vote people off instead of vote people to stay on. The thing is, if that happened, the results would be more predictable. Predictability yields boredom and could cause some (not all, certainly!) to tune out.
With the current system, you have to watch Wednesday's show because you really don't know who is leaving the show. The controversy over seemingly "inexplicable" (although I have explained it numerous times) results gets even more press for the show. Sure some people vow to not tune in once their favorite is slighted, but ratings overall show that viewership increases week after week.
The adult fans of the show (as opposed to the 12 year olds who vote 100 times every Tuesday night for their favorites) should understand the simple game theory behind the voting system.
The irony is that FOX likes it when people like Mac Diva and IdolFan reject the simple game theory explanation of the "inexplicable" results, because FOX wants you to believe you are directly voting people off when in fact you are not. Even I sometimes cannot help but say "Amy Adams was voted off...who will get the voted off tonight?" although I fully understand the game theory behind it. This is the brilliant part of the show from FOX's standpoint.
FOX should be commended for keeping AI such a popular show, considering that other reality shows that had huge followings in the beginning (like Survivor), started to have ratings drop by the third season. Not nearly as many people tuned into Survivor: Africa, as they did Australia or the original Borneo. AI 3 has MORE people watching than AI 1, and it's Tuesday night show is the often the highest rated show on television, beating CSI. Wow.
14 - Mac Diva
What sophistry. Pappy expressed his real motivation about changing the rules in comments on another thread. He wants the rules changed to make it harder for African-American contestants to win. Period. He apparently believes this 'let us vote people off' pretext is the road to that. (There are legal issues in targeting a racial/ethnic group for discrimination the way Pappy wants to, but I will save that for a possible entry.) However, as I said above, voting people on and voting them off are the two sides of the same coin. For every vote cast to keep someone on, there is a negative effect on contestants not voted for. When that negative effect becomes cumulative, those contestants impacted are off the show.
What Pappy is posting here is not 'game theory.' It is a pretext to support discrimination against contestants based on something other than their performances.
15 - i
Pappy's dead right. Exactly on the money. How the rest of you are arguing against that point is beyond me. It's like you're not reading the logic.
I haven't read any posts by any of you people elsewhere, so I've no clue about any of this "racially motivated" stuff. So I'll have to ignore that.
What I do know is that what Mac Diva said: "For every vote cast to keep someone on, there is a negative effect on contestants not voted for. When that negative effect becomes cumulative, those contestants impacted are off the show," is a provably inaccurate, or at least misleading, statement.
There were 10 contestants on the show the other day. Let's just for the minute assume 20 voting calls are made (for simplicity's sake.)
Say the majority of the voters agree with your taste -- that John and Camille are terrible, need to go. But let's say some minority of the callers don't agree with your taste, and like John Stevens a lot.
So 15 people want to get rid of john stevens. 5 want him to stay and know that he has to have people not wanting him there after his recent performance.
5 people call to keep john stevens. No biggy, though, for the Stevens haters -- they WAY outnumber the fans. Right?
But watch:
John haters 1, 2, 3 vote for Latoya.
John haters 4, 5, 6 vote for Fantasia.
John haters 7, 8, 9 vote for George.
John haters 10, 11, 12 vote for DeGarmo.
John haters 13, 14, 15 vote for JPL.
Pretty simple to add that up and see that John's just received the most votes.
Of course you could argue that somehow ALL 15 of those people would randomly pick the same not-John performer to vote for. But that's statistically... well, unlikely, to say the least.
So a vote to keep someone DOES NOT EQUAL a vote to remove someone. With ten contestants, a vote to KEEP someone is worth 1/9th the value of a vote to kick someone off. Because while the people voting to keep john ALL VOTE FOR JOHN, the people voting to kick john off vote for ONE OF NINE PEOPLE.
And notice, too, what happens in this example: Suddenly some random performer who did a decent job gets the boot.
Now for the musical part of my argument: John Stevens has gotten a lot of my votes. He's DIFFERENT. He sure as hell can't sing Motown, in front of a Motown band. (Or THE Motown band.) But for those of us who don't much care for Motown, that doesn't really matter. He's different and deserves to get far, AND the show will be way more interesting for those of us interested in diverse talents as long as he sticks around. Same with John Peter. (Same, too, with Amy, unfortunately.)
Camille, on the other hand, I think is horrendous ALWAYS, and I wish she'd go away.
Furthermore, I think Latoya is a great singer but somehow doesn't stand out very well. That girl with the flower in her hair is the most boring contestant for me, I can't understand how she has any fans: she strikes me as exhibiting an exact AVERAGE of peoples' tastes. There's nothing remarkable about her at all (IMO).
Fantasia and George Huff are the best entertainers, have distinctive voices, and have done a fantastic job all along. Either of those two should, I think, regardless of whether or not they get much further, be able to sell a lot of records, and will be signed. I would say based on pure ability to sing music that fits in a modern pop mold, either of those two deserves to win.
16 - Mac Diva
Hmmm. The commenter 'i' appears only on four American Idol threads. He usually follows Pappy and always agrees with Pappy. In fact, he extends whatever Pappy is saying, Unfortunately, doubling Pappy's claims does not make them more accurate.
All 'i' has done in this comment is confirm not voted for results must be cumulative before a contestant is ejected. That is what I said.
17 - i
Hmmmm. What a freakin' weird, paranoid trip you must be on, inventing some correlation between pappy and myself. I've never heard of pappy before tonight, I've never noticed him on any of the other threads I've talked on, and if what I just did is confirm what you were saying then you weren't saying it very clearly. In fact what you're saying still isn't clear, in this "not voted for results must be cumulative before a contestant is ejected." What the hell does that mean?
I only really come here to talk some about American Idol; I decided to get in on this discussion because it looked like there needed to be some clarification about the mathematical logic behind saying that voting FOR someone isn't the same as voting to get someone else off.
Anyway, if you wanna think there's some grand collaboration between myself and pappy, feel free.
18 - Dan
i, So you've not met Mac Diva?
uhh, you're not a public figure are ya? Never mind.
I'm not that familiar with the program, but you've illustrated very clearly this voting paradox in comment #15. It occurs to me that casting positive votes also would more accurately reflect the voters choice to be voted off as the field narrowed, than in the beginning.
The most perfectly fair way would seem to be a weighted system where each voter assigns points to multiple contestants, or more simply, just picks their top 3 say. As pappy pointed out though, it sounds as if the producers have designed the voting to achieve a more unpredictable result. interesting.
19 - Al Barger
OK, first things first. Everyone but Diva is an evil, conspiratorial RACIST dedicated to screwing the black man from his rightful shot on American Idol. Granted.
Beyond that, though, I can't believe all you people are spending the time to watch this crappy show, much less devote the effort to writing about it.
You know, rather than watching these kids from the glee club sing Motown covers, you could have spent the hour actually listening to Motown. Those Stevie Wonder CDs still play great.
20 - i
Al Barger: so why are YOU here in this thread, then?
21 - C
I hate to say this because the girl can't help people voting for her, but Camille happens to be Hawaiian and Philipino, and that is a huge fan base that will rally around a cause. I've seen it posted on those websites.
22 - Scott Pepper
As I've said elsewhere, now Jasmine has the whole of that "huge fan base" all to herself. She has a shot at the top three now, as far as I'm concerned.