Post by Inside Australian Idol on Sept 6, 2003 0:35:56 GMT 10
Here is an interesting post from 'merlinmelb' at the offical Yahoo group:
There is Method to the Madness
After every Monday show, a lot of people in this forum complain about
how those who bother to spend money and register their votes are
ignorant of real talent. Perhaps they are. Or perhaps most of the
posters in this forum (especially those who whinge endlessly) are
just biased towards their favourites as well. Not to mention that
maybe a majority of them are mere press agents for some contestants
pretending to be know-it-all talent scouts.
But after three weeks of AI Top 40, it is perhaps better for us to
have a look at the psyche of the general public that will make or
break the rest of AI - those who spend their time and money to vote
for their favourites.
First, the demographic. With five men and a solitary woman (a rock
chick at that) making it so far, it would appear that most of the
voters are females. It is difficult to pinpoint the exact age
demographic, but based on Australia's choices, I should say that
these are mostly the under 24's and their mothers and nanas.
Second, their taste. Is this demographic really as ignorant as a lot
of the posters in this forum suggest? Not really, but they're not the
most discerning as well.
The choice of this demographic suggests that it's not just about the
voice. Otherwise Shannon and Lorena from week one, Hailey and Cosima
from week two, and Jennifer and Yolande from week three, would have
featured prominently in the top three. But all six were rejected.
But contrary to what some posters here suggest, it's also not just
about the looks and stage presence. Otherwise, Peter from week one
and Guy from week three would not have gone through, and Rebecca from
week two should have gone ahead of Kelly; Matt from week two wasn't
really good looking as well (not to mention that he was practically
motionless while singing). And Ryan should have easily breezed
through at week three.
So what does this demographic want? They want people who they can
relate to.
Peter had the best male voice in week one, he's down to earth in his
ways, and he sang a popular love song. He was top in the voting
despite being seemingly lost on stage; the voters were willing to
allow him to grow. Daniel came second. Yes, his being good looking
was a plus. But he also a good voice, sang a popular classic, and did
not really muck around with his performance. And those who missed
out? Well first, there was Eli. Terrific performance, but not a lot
of our dominant demographic were familiar with her song. Not to
mention that she probably lost votes with her Reggie (from Big
Brother) comment. Lorena was also terrific, but the song she sang may
have not touched our target demographic as well. Shannon also had a
great performance, but he probably overextended the song a bit and
lost some of our target demographic.
Matt was the standout choice by our demographic in week two. Again,
he sang a classic song that all the mothers and nanas would know, and
would happily tell their girls about; and he had a beautiful voice (I
don't think he got through with his looks). Second was Kelly. I
reckon this one was pretty close, and what may have got Kelly through
was her choice of song (one of the most popular ones playing
currently) and that bit of attitude she showed Dicko; and of course
she had a niche rock market all to her own. Rebecca was better than
Kelly in practically all areas, but she could have done better with a
more familiar song. Cosima and Hailey both had terrific performances,
and they were probably the best voices among the group. But of
course, our demographic doesn't want divas. Marc was really good,
too, but like Shannon the previous week, he probably overextended the
song a bit and alienated some key voters.
Shannon was the standout choice in week three. I personally think
Shannon is the best package so far in the competition – he does not
have the best voice, but he knows what to do with it; he has the
looks and background our demographic will like. Shannon also
showcased his talent without alienating those familiar with the song,
in contrast to Shannon from week one, Marc from week two, and most
obviously, Guy from week three. I reckon Guy narrowly escaped as the
second choice in week three. Guy would have been the standout choice
of the week by pure voice quality alone, but I believe the way he
overextended the song alienated a lot of voters. To illustrate the
point, I reckon Guy would not have made it if Peter, Daniel, or Matt
were in this group. Rebekah, though excellent, could have done better
with a more familiar song. Jennifer was just unfortunate to be in a
group with three performers who really stood out. I reckon Yolande
lost a lot of voters with her sharp retorts towards Dicko – there's a
fine line between someone with an attitude (Kelly) and someone with
an attitude problem (Yolande).
Finally, the past three weeks are a good indicator of who the last
four are going to be. The fact that there's only one female so far in
the top ten may be good for the remaining females, in the sense that
the audience may try to balance the top 10 a bit. However, we have at
least two guys (Brandon and Robert) who seem to perfectly fit the AI
mould, and they're in different weeks. I reckon a spot in the final
ten is theirs to lose, leaving two spots for 14 contestants to jostle
for.
In any sense, the remaining contestants must keep in mind that the
first six got through because of only one thing: they connected with
the audience best. They may not have been the best singers, they may
not have been the best lookers, they may not have been the best
performers. But they were able to establish that connection with the
audience, which to me is the most important.
Some people have already stated their favourites in this forum. But
however good these are at singing, if they can't establish the right
connection with the audience that matters, they wouldn't get in.
And they wouldn't deserve to.
There is Method to the Madness
After every Monday show, a lot of people in this forum complain about
how those who bother to spend money and register their votes are
ignorant of real talent. Perhaps they are. Or perhaps most of the
posters in this forum (especially those who whinge endlessly) are
just biased towards their favourites as well. Not to mention that
maybe a majority of them are mere press agents for some contestants
pretending to be know-it-all talent scouts.
But after three weeks of AI Top 40, it is perhaps better for us to
have a look at the psyche of the general public that will make or
break the rest of AI - those who spend their time and money to vote
for their favourites.
First, the demographic. With five men and a solitary woman (a rock
chick at that) making it so far, it would appear that most of the
voters are females. It is difficult to pinpoint the exact age
demographic, but based on Australia's choices, I should say that
these are mostly the under 24's and their mothers and nanas.
Second, their taste. Is this demographic really as ignorant as a lot
of the posters in this forum suggest? Not really, but they're not the
most discerning as well.
The choice of this demographic suggests that it's not just about the
voice. Otherwise Shannon and Lorena from week one, Hailey and Cosima
from week two, and Jennifer and Yolande from week three, would have
featured prominently in the top three. But all six were rejected.
But contrary to what some posters here suggest, it's also not just
about the looks and stage presence. Otherwise, Peter from week one
and Guy from week three would not have gone through, and Rebecca from
week two should have gone ahead of Kelly; Matt from week two wasn't
really good looking as well (not to mention that he was practically
motionless while singing). And Ryan should have easily breezed
through at week three.
So what does this demographic want? They want people who they can
relate to.
Peter had the best male voice in week one, he's down to earth in his
ways, and he sang a popular love song. He was top in the voting
despite being seemingly lost on stage; the voters were willing to
allow him to grow. Daniel came second. Yes, his being good looking
was a plus. But he also a good voice, sang a popular classic, and did
not really muck around with his performance. And those who missed
out? Well first, there was Eli. Terrific performance, but not a lot
of our dominant demographic were familiar with her song. Not to
mention that she probably lost votes with her Reggie (from Big
Brother) comment. Lorena was also terrific, but the song she sang may
have not touched our target demographic as well. Shannon also had a
great performance, but he probably overextended the song a bit and
lost some of our target demographic.
Matt was the standout choice by our demographic in week two. Again,
he sang a classic song that all the mothers and nanas would know, and
would happily tell their girls about; and he had a beautiful voice (I
don't think he got through with his looks). Second was Kelly. I
reckon this one was pretty close, and what may have got Kelly through
was her choice of song (one of the most popular ones playing
currently) and that bit of attitude she showed Dicko; and of course
she had a niche rock market all to her own. Rebecca was better than
Kelly in practically all areas, but she could have done better with a
more familiar song. Cosima and Hailey both had terrific performances,
and they were probably the best voices among the group. But of
course, our demographic doesn't want divas. Marc was really good,
too, but like Shannon the previous week, he probably overextended the
song a bit and alienated some key voters.
Shannon was the standout choice in week three. I personally think
Shannon is the best package so far in the competition – he does not
have the best voice, but he knows what to do with it; he has the
looks and background our demographic will like. Shannon also
showcased his talent without alienating those familiar with the song,
in contrast to Shannon from week one, Marc from week two, and most
obviously, Guy from week three. I reckon Guy narrowly escaped as the
second choice in week three. Guy would have been the standout choice
of the week by pure voice quality alone, but I believe the way he
overextended the song alienated a lot of voters. To illustrate the
point, I reckon Guy would not have made it if Peter, Daniel, or Matt
were in this group. Rebekah, though excellent, could have done better
with a more familiar song. Jennifer was just unfortunate to be in a
group with three performers who really stood out. I reckon Yolande
lost a lot of voters with her sharp retorts towards Dicko – there's a
fine line between someone with an attitude (Kelly) and someone with
an attitude problem (Yolande).
Finally, the past three weeks are a good indicator of who the last
four are going to be. The fact that there's only one female so far in
the top ten may be good for the remaining females, in the sense that
the audience may try to balance the top 10 a bit. However, we have at
least two guys (Brandon and Robert) who seem to perfectly fit the AI
mould, and they're in different weeks. I reckon a spot in the final
ten is theirs to lose, leaving two spots for 14 contestants to jostle
for.
In any sense, the remaining contestants must keep in mind that the
first six got through because of only one thing: they connected with
the audience best. They may not have been the best singers, they may
not have been the best lookers, they may not have been the best
performers. But they were able to establish that connection with the
audience, which to me is the most important.
Some people have already stated their favourites in this forum. But
however good these are at singing, if they can't establish the right
connection with the audience that matters, they wouldn't get in.
And they wouldn't deserve to.