TiVo Community Forums Archives - FOX Had To Rig The "Idol" Vote

TiVoCommunity.com
(c)opyright 1995-2005 All rights reserved
indexcheckTC
This area is a static history of posts in the TiVo Community Forum Archive.
This archive history was made for the simple indexing of search sites like Google.

Pages:1

FOX Had To Rig The "Idol" Vote
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: iceisles

Granted, I am a huge Clay fan, but not one gallop poll I saw (and I saw close to a dozen) had Ruben ahead. In fact, for many of them (like CNN.com's), Clay was comfortably ahead. I may be cynical, but I suspect that FOX rigged this vote. Ruben was a nice fellow, but Clay definitely had far greater range in his voice and was a better on-stage presence. It shows how America's voting scheme is truly a popularity contest.

Posted by: Dafaso

You should read the American Idol thread to see how one contestant could have significantly more fans but the voting would be practically even.

Posted by: cello

ditto Dafaso.

and, well, it *is* a popularity contest. Voting for an "idol" and all...

Posted by: ufo4sale

the voting system is completly flawed. When they have the 3rd one they should change the voting system. They did max out the votes last night.

Posted by: johnjohn

quote:
Originally posted by Dafaso
You should read the American Idol thread to see how one contestant could have significantly more fans but the voting would be practically even.

After picking through 111 posts, I'm hoping someone can just explain it. I read a bit on busy signals, but am not sure what you're talking about.

Posted by: DLiquid

quote:
Originally posted by johnjohn
After picking through 111 posts, I'm hoping someone can just explain it. I read a bit on busy signals, but am not sure what you're talking about.

Just imagine if the phone lines could only take a maximum of 100 calls in 3 hours for each contestant. That was their maximum capacity. Now imagine 1 million calls being attempted. You'd probably end up with 100 calls for both contestants, but since things are a bit random, maybe one contestant got only 99 calls. You can see there's not really a valid winner here, since the majority of votes weren't even counted.

Walters summed it up extremely well with this analogy:

quote:
Originally posted by walters
You weighed Ruben and Clay using a scale that was only capable of registering 100 pounds and declared them roughly the same.

Posted by: LoadStar

Right, DLiquid.

Put simply, because of the way the phone system was set up - because there was far more votes than the system could handle, and because there was a set voting time period - given perfect phone conditions, the votes could have been tied.

In more detail, given what has been disclosed, the phone system was at peak capacity for both contestant's phone lines for the entire voting period (3 hours). Any variation in the votes could as easily be attributed to certain calls being able to get through the public switched telephone system than an actual public preference for one contestant over another.

So, basically, it was a random element - who could get through the phone system and who couldn't - rather than a clear sampling of the preference of the voting public that chose the American Idol winner. A coin toss would probably have been as accurate.

A better, but still not perfect, voting system would be to have a single phone number, then a menu that you choose your contestant from. All the voting would then have to go through the same number, essentially imposing a sampling method on the vote results. It still would be random as to if your call gets through, but that's the basis of a sampling - every contestant would face a shared random selection, rather than each contestant dealing with a different random selection.

Posted by: vertigo235

I think another problem is that people are voting more than once.

This puts a HUGE strain on the system because people keep redialing over and over.

They should log the number and not allow people to vote more than once, then less people would be calling and it won't be overloaded. Effectively this will limit 1 vote per number though.

Posted by: TeeSee

Anybody see Good Day Live today (actually yesterday, May 22)? They said there was a rigging controversy. Something to do with Ryan first saying that the voting margin was only 13,000 then saying it was 1,300. Maybe someone can get the particulars. I didn't get the details because, well, I don't care. They're both getting recording contracts and Clay didn't win (yay!).

They also said that Clay knew he lost ten or fifteen minutes before it was announced because of the way he was turned toward Ruben to congratulate him at the announcement, as if he was suspiciously at the ready. They said he saw the card Ryan was holding before the commercial break. They tried to make a big controversy out of it, for some reason. But then, GDL is a Fox show.

Posted by: NJChris

quote:
Originally posted by vertigo235
I think another problem is that people are voting more than once.

This puts a HUGE strain on the system because people keep redialing over and over.

They should log the number and not allow people to vote more than once, then less people would be calling and it won't be overloaded. Effectively this will limit 1 vote per number though.

They should only allow 1 call per #. There are those stalking fans that will set up an autodialer and have it on all night.

Posted by: walters

What gets me is that I don't think I've seen anyone in the mainstream explain correctly what's wrong with the voting. I see plenty of people focusing on Ryan messing up the numbers, but nobody has pointed out why the numbers are meaningless.

Posted by: vman

So in essence, under the current system, if you want to support Clay, you should call Ruben's number and not hang up! Just keep the line busy for as long as possible, so others can't get through!

Posted by: DLiquid

quote:
Originally posted by vman
So in essence, under the current system, if you want to support Clay, you should call Ruben's number and not hang up! Just keep the line busy for as long as possible, so others can't get through!

Wow, that's an interesting observation. How weird.

Posted by: Skittles

According to a story on IMDB, Fox announced that they have no intention of doing a recount. They also mention that the actual gap between Ruben and Clay was 130,000, not 1,300 or 13,000.

The story is available here. In addition, there's a story right beneath that about how Simon may not be coming back next season.

Posted by: DLiquid

So now it's 130,000. Why do I not believe them? :rolleyes:

No matter how much of a tool Simon Cowell is, the show could never be as good without him. For me, he kind of defines the show.

Posted by: mask2343

Don't they hang up on you once the taped message is done?

Posted by: TonyD79

Yes they do, but you don't have to listen to the whole message. Also, it is not just the line at the counting house. There can be exchange to exchange tie-ups that could affect the vote, also.

All in all, a bad system.

But they are doing a lot of the right thing in releasing records simultaneously. And don't worry for Clay. Not winning hasn't hurt Tamyra Gray or Justin Guarini any. All of the Top 12 got exposure. Now it is up to them to make or break on their own merits in the market place.

Posted by: ISWIZ

Sounds like Gore/Bush all over again!

Posted by: cello

quote:
Originally posted by walters
What gets me is that I don't think I've seen anyone in the mainstream explain correctly what's wrong with the voting. I see plenty of people focusing on Ryan messing up the numbers, but nobody has pointed out why the numbers are meaningless.

I think their area lot of people sticking their fingers in their ears and going "lalalala, I caaan't heearrr youuu!" Especially the producers and the network - the last thing they want is for people to realize that the whole voting thing really is a sham.

I also think that many people (or at least the mainstream media) tend to confuse explanations for excuses or whining. Someone intelligent says "this is a calm, unbiased and coherent explanation of why the vote was very poorly done" and the media is likely to jump on them for being a crybaby about the outcome or something.

Oh well. I have no idea why I find this so fascinating. Wasting time is fun. :D