Is American Idol Bad?

It is just plain bad. Absolutely unwatchable television.

pearljam4512 wrote:

I have to admit I've been watching. At first I didn't like the thought of "making it by winning a game" but my wife has me hooked. Here is how I see it. This David Cook guy is amazing and if it takes this game to get someone like this out in the music world go for it. I might never watch this show after he gets the boot but I'm hooked on this guy. Here is a song from his band that broke up a couple of years a go. This is truely an awesome song. What would Ed and the boys think of someone like this? A game show winner or a musician?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfsdygQ1laA

its completely selling out and should have no merit with real artist.

Thank God for Pearl Jam and Radiohead and U2 and MMJ and Foo Fighters and the Black Keys and BRMC and the BOSS and others for being original. They may not put out perfect songs all the time, people may complain about stuff they do (like the people who say Avocado was a terrible record), but who cares??? They fucking rock and seeing them live gives you that feeling that you dont get when you listen to Daughtry, Nickleback or Bo Bice.

I wouldn't say that most of the artists you listed were original. Good bands yes, but they're hardly breaking new ground (except maybe Radiohead).

Can You Say Octopus? wrote:

Ed said it best "Its about time that these corporate cocksuckers leave songs like this alone..." --MSG 1998

I dont know if im more pissed that people like it or that Pete gave Idol the rights to the song (along with CSI). THe build up is terrible. It is generic and the original and PJ's cover piss all over it.

American idol puts hacks into the music industry. They take average people with average talent and package them up with nice shiny bows and sell them to the masses...which eat that shit up...It makes it seem like anyone can be in the music industry, which is just flat out untrue...It does take talent, creativity and originality. It is no wonder that music sales are down with the stale crap that is pushed down consumers throats.

Obvious exception is Carrie Underwood...She has an awesome voice and there is a fantastic version of Paradise City on youtube...

Thank God for Pearl Jam and Radiohead and U2 and MMJ and Foo Fighters and the Black Keys and BRMC and the BOSS and others for being original. They may not put out perfect songs all the time, people may complain about stuff they do (like the people who say Avocado was a terrible record), but who cares??? They fucking rock and seeing them live gives you that feeling that you dont get when you listen to Daughtry, Nickleback or Bo Bice.

Please stop supporting unoriginal,boring artists...if you do it, they will keep making music.

Don't you realize that American Idol has nothing to do with the fact that there are "hacks" in the music business? For a prime example, look at Paula Abdul herself- she was terrible, but she had a record deal long long before american idol. And yes, when I was in 5th grade, I was into it. It's called mainstream pop. It doesn't matter if they canceled american idol tomorrow, it's still going to be there. Pearl Jam, Radiohead, the Foo, etc, are not part of this world, don't you get that? All of us here may value rock bands like them, but the fact remains, some people LIKE insipid pop music- children, old ladies, whathaveyou. American Idol is not trying to produce the next great rock band, they are trying to produce the next great pop star. if you can't see the different, you don't have much of an understanding of popular music! I saw an episode a few years back when that guy Daughtry was on. I think he sang a creed song or something, and Simon's comment was something like "this is american idol, what are you trying to do?" So there it is right there- a *creed* song was too rock for what they are going for. Sure, they might call some of the contestants "rockers" but they mean "for american idol." The guys that are on that show *know* that by simply being on it they are giving up all cred. they know that. American Idol isn't about cred, it's about pop stars.

It's also partly a *singing* contest. just *singing*. would I ever listen to a mariah carey album? hells no. Is there anything original about her music? hells no. but can she sing? hell yeah.

If we abolished mainstream pop, what will we pearl jam fans have to feel high and mighty over?

chiefojibwa wrote:

if you like this shit then you are part of the problem

you think that there should only be rock music? That we should just abolish all pop singers, boy bands, pop rock acts, or anything else that we personally don't enjoy?

and then if there were only "rock" music, where would you propose to draw the line between what is non-poppy enough to be acceptable? Who do you think should determine whether a band has enough cred? How would we determine who was causing a "problem"? Would we allow Death Cab for Cutie? I don't know...they might be part of a big "problem"....

everyone also seems to be skipping over the fact the Idol is *tv show.* It's honestly just a "bigger" version of star search or any other talent shows that have come and gone over the years. Yes, I do like this "shit," as in I like the TV show. I like the competition aspect of it and I think the over-the-top nature is amusing (Ryan Seacrest, for some indeterminant reason, cracks me up, he seems to have a very tongue-in-cheek approach to the whole thing). Do I like the actually music that comes from it? No, but some people do. Yes the prize is a record deal but so what. What have we even heard from last year's winner? is she really corrupting the music industry? (the "music industry" is a mute point now anyway. they are going down the tubes fast, and they dug their own graves in several ways).

It's apparent to everyone, including the people on the show, that american idol is a TV show and big business. I don't think any of them would claim that it's about the music. If you're on american idol you're either 1) a pure pop/RB/Country singer or 2) you're a rock singer who has given up on trying to be quality and have any cred.

that being said, both Bo Bice and Fantasia had pretty good performances when they were on the show this year...personally I still wouldn't buy their music, but they seem to be doing at a good job at *what they do.* Which is different than what the bands I like do.

Joe2TheRevenge wrote:

that is exactly the problem though.

Last year's winner, like all the previous winners, ARE corrupting the music industry by being just another disposable product with a 6 month shelf-life.

legit artists are losing advertising dollars, tour support, etc... to the Idol people who get mass exposure for a short amount of time to capitalize on their short popularity.

They sink 50 million dollars into advertising for Clay Aiken, but 10 other artists put out records that aren't even given a half page advertisement in Rolling Stone

THAT is the problem. They are a product, not music. and real artists are suffering.

And when they ask their record companies why, they just say "oh, ummm, it's because of illegal downloading that you didn't get your 15 cent cut of the $15 price tag".....give me a fucking break. Real artists are being raped because of this shit.

But do think that if there was no American Idol the record companies wouldn't still be signing "disposable" artists?

In 1999, there was no American Idol, but there was plenty of pure pop crap. Britney Spears, the backstreet boys, christina alguleira, just to name a few. The record companies started putting money into them instead of good rock bands way back then. Do I think this was "right"? Of course not, I want good bands I enjoy to get signed and get exposure. But American Idol is just a continuation of something that was happening anyway.

And unfortunately I don't think that will change. The record companies are doing SHIT for business right now, and it's about risk. It was safer for record companies to dump money into Britney Spears in 1999 than into some rock band- there will always be teanie boppers with their parents' money who like insipid pop. American Idol is genius business move because it cuts the risk way down-you've already tested whether the population will like the artist you sign. Is this a good thing for music at large? Hells no, I'm not claiming that. But there's also no solution- getting rid of American Idol isn't going to help the record company's business position. In fact, one COULD argue that if they make enough money off shit like this, they could have more to put into promoting quality bands that offer more risk.

Let's just get this straight- the music market is driven by supply, not demand. People need to be exposed to music to like something. Many people do not have the time/resources/inclination/whatever to weed through file sharing sites and indie record stores. None of us got into pearl jam because we stumbled upon them at some hole-in-the wall. We found out about them through the mainstream record business. Therefore, if the record companies have decided to cut risk by signing a disproprotionate number of bad pop acts, as they started to back in 1999, then there's not much can be done- as long as they produce it, people will come. If they put out a good band, people will like that too. The problem is, good rock bands haven't proven themselves to be fail-safe investments.

As a side note, the record companies know where they went wrong, that's why I said they dug their own graves. They are correct to say the downloads hurt their business, but only because they didn't adapt. They fought it instead of changing their business models. They know this, it was because of downloading but it was they who screwed up and they totally know that. It doesn't help them now though, they're still out of money and still don't have enough to take risks. Placing blame on whomever isn't gonna help the current situation.

A lot of good opinions on both sides and what I like best about the show is that it brings music into people's homes, front and center, twice a week. Strictly based on the entertainment value it can be that bad. I would much rather have people enjoy AI rather than Dancing with Stars or shitty sit coms. People who didn't know who Bon Jovi and Tony Bennett are, now know, and now they have opinions based on real experience...be it good or bad...and who to say who's bad? Certainly Dolly Parton and Mariah Carey deserve some credit, whether you personally like them or not.

Everyone young kid start off liking cheese(I did) but as we grow older us kids who loved Britney, Back Street Men, The Monkees etc start to look around and they even sometimes find that their parent's music really isn't that bad, afterall. Or better yet they take their own path to find out what's valid. I notice it when I go to see Eric Clapton...young kids everywhere and that can't be a bad thing for music. Exposure to all kinds of music makes music fans. I'm not saying David Cook is the new Clapton but AI does open the door so people can find out more, if they so choose.

I absolutely love how some people rave about how this show is so bad and bad for the industry. It's actually comical to see people get so bent outta shape. Maybe it threatens their beliefs that pop music is actually kinda ok. Who ever mentioned Carrie Underwood is spot on. She's got the goods and so does Daughtry and David Cook, and this coming from someone who has seen it all and is an expert...cause ain't we all

celebration wrote:

I absolutely love how some people rave about how this show is so bad and bad for the industry. It's actually comical to see people get so bent outta shape.

To me, this is a very "young" view. I remember back in high school, it was so important to HATE music of lesser quality or cred. Hell, it was super tough for me to defend my position on pearl jam because they were mainstream. it's throwing stones, because *you're* not secure in *your* taste in music. You're afraid of being a poser. At some point you just grow out of that. I don't care that bad music exists because good music exists too. If people were to argue with me that John Mayer is good or something, sure I'll argue that, but I don't *care* that he's out there doing what he wants to do and making money off people who eat it up, that's *their* problem.

celebration wrote:

Maybe it threatens their beliefs that pop music is actually kinda ok. Who ever mentioned Carrie Underwood is spot on. She's got the goods and so does Daughtry and David Cook, and this coming from someone who has seen it all and is an expert...cause ain't we all

Also Underwood, Daughtry, and Cook are SINGERS. We might not like their style of music, but yes, they CAN sing. SINGING is what they do. If you are a pure singer, I think American Idol makes a lot of sense for you to audition for. Underwood, Daughtry, and Cook know that they are not some cool rock act, and they're not trying to be. They are trying to use their talent and make a career out of it. They're not trying to be the best song writers or the coolest front person. Honestly, if I could SING like any of them, I'm not sure I wouldn't audition for american idol. Some people just have a talent for singing, and this is area they can showcase it make something of it. Rock music as we consider it, on the other hand, isn't about being a technically proficient singer, it's more organic. It's two different beasts. I don't think it's right to say that singers don't have a place making a good career for themselves. It's just like what I was saying about Mariah Carey- her music is incredibly boring and bad and has very little meaning and I would never want to listen to it. But she can hit notes that only tiny percent of the population can. The boring music she makes allows her to do that. I almost think that being such a technically good singer like that would be detrimental to a rock band, it's too perfect. And that's not limited to singing...think of like super technical "popular" guitar players, I'm thinking like Eric Johnson or something- yeah you sit there and go "wow" when you hear it, but I don't think most people really *love* the songs and get into them, but that's ok because it's not the *point* of what he does.

IT is bad.

There are different reasons I think so. For one, they dont even get to chose their own song. They can pick a song, but if the american idol people dont like it then, they have a choice of other songs that have been picked by the people.
So when the judges (which I will get to later) tell the person "I just dont think that song was you", its not like they could have helped it.
The judges are just there for drama and popularity, they dont have a say in who wins. So I dont regard the contestants as musicians (at least while on the show), just contestants. Because it comes down to whos the most popular, not whos the most talented.


Dont do it, its not worth it!