‘Idol’ needs a makeover to keep it attractive
Throw in a cash prize, range of contenders so viewers, hopefuls will care
"American Idol" has stood the test of time for six seasons and shows few signs of slowing down. But that hardly means it isn't due for a makeover anyway.
Despite its status atop the ratings mountain, season seven is a pivotal one for "Idol." Last year brought a disappointing amount of "Idol" buzz, and most of the attention centered around the Sanjaya saga. Sure, the ratings were great, but the show was at a point where it could have broadcast drunken karaoke and still killed in the ratings.
That won't last forever. This is the year the show is going to have to get back to the fundamentals in order to ensure its continued domination.
A ratings giant, but ...
Take a reality show that's a ratings juggernaut, add a WGA strike that eliminates a lot of potential competitors, and FOX is left with a sure bet to please advertisers in 2008. The task, however, is to remake this into a program that viewers watch because it's compelling, not because it's the best of a bad series of options on TV.
For that to happen, the stakes have to be higher than they are now. Granted, few would turn down a record deal, and none of those who begin the audition process have any reason to complain about the top prize.
|
That minor difference reached its peak last season when runner-up Blake Lewis reportedly said that he wanted to wear a "Vote for Jordin" T-shirt during the finale. That's sweet and wholesome, but dangerous. If the finalists don’t care about winning, why should viewers?
So a big task for "Idol" this season will be to make the contestants really want to win, to make being the winner mean something.
In other words, "Idol" needs to raise the stakes for the champion. A record deal is one thing, but tack on a $1 million cash prize, and you might see people really start to look and sound like they want to win.
While multiple finalists may emerge with a shot at fulfilling their musical dreams, only one will be getting a life-changing sum of money as well. And with all the revenue the show brings in, "Idol" can easily afford the expense. (Just cut some of makeup budget for judge Paula Abdul and host Ryan Seacrest.)
"American Idol" also needs to make the contestants more compelling for viewers. Heartwarming videos were a staple of the show until last season, and those segments made it hard to sit out the voting process. If you didn't vote, your contestant and her family and dog and teachers and friends who love her would all be very sad, and who wants that on their conscience?
Once the guest mentors started getting more prominent, they started taking up more airtime, which eliminated the traditional pieces. But in hindsight, did all the clips of Gwen Stefani pretending to care about what the contestants were doing add anything but massive viewer eye-rolling to the show?
And the winner is … um …
|
That can be blamed on the judges.
Even if Randy Jackson, Simon Cowell and Paula are starting to see the same faces every year and the bad-but-belligerent contestants are sapping their energy, they need to do a better job of getting a group of talented and compelling singers for the fans to choose from. For a superstar to emerge as the winner, there has to be at least one or two potential stars among the finalists.
The formula for finding a contestant who will appeal to the masses has been consistent: Older men do better than younger men, while younger women tend to outshine those in their mid- to late 20s. Apart from that data point, it's always nice to give the audience choices. In season five, the final six included a country singer (Pickler), a sort-of alt rocker (Daughtry), a standards singer (Elliot Yamin), a teenager with a big voice (Paris Bennett), a female pop act (Katharine McPhee) and a — well, whatever Taylor Hicks was.
Last year, judges seemed to be seeking a more polished voice than in the past, as epitomized by Melinda Doolittle, who was the favorite until being knocked off. Doolittle was the best singer, and the judges told her so every week. But ultimately, watching her dominate was neither fun nor compelling, and she finished a surprising third.
Click for related content |
What the viewers seem to want is to watch an unpolished singer get better each week until they emerge as a star, rather than watching a more polished singer improve a tiny bit every time out.
"Idol" also took on fewer teenagers, but a teenage girl won. No 16-year-old made the list at all, even though anyone following the youth market knows that young women can sell a boatload of records.
For season seven, the show needs to do a better job of finding potential superstars and not just nice voices. If those stars are teenagers, fine. If they're really raw, who cares? Either they will grow into their role or they will be voted off. But "Idol" can't afford a third consecutive year where its winner goes straight to the D-list instead of the top of the charts.
- Discuss Story On Newsvine
- Rate Story:
View popularLowHigh - Instant Message
MORE FROM AMERICAN IDOL |
| Add American Idol headlines to your news reader: |
Sponsored links
Resource guide




