The Talent is Only a Shooting Star

When the talent-scout television show Star Search, debuted in 1983, no one questioned the validity of the show’s objective – giving young performers to share their talent with America. Hosted originally by Ed McMahon, this popular show provided the foundation for many celebrities’ careers – such big names as Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, Ray Romano, and Dennis Miller. Taking the Star Search formula to a new level, the cultural television phenomenon American Idol has gain popularity over its four-season run. Although the show’s format and outcome have similarities to Star Search, American Idol has many differences – and these differences have raised many questions in the music industry. Most importantly, does American Idol produce legitimate musical artists…or are they simply shooting stars – passing by and leaving nothing behind?

In recent years, many similar talent shows have become popular. Fame, Nashville Star, and Project Runway are just a few of them. Star Search itself came back around for a second shot in 2003. However, only one show has been as popular as Star Search was when it debuted, and that is American Idol. During season four’s first week, Idol aired to an audience of nearly 66 million viewers. Season one winner Kelly Clarkson went on to sell just under 300,000 copies of her debut album “Thankful,” in the first week. Not only did her CD rank her at number one, but it also outsold the reunion album from the 1980s superstars Fleetwood Mac.

Despite these astounding statistics, the popular television show receives a large amount of criticism. The show is exciting and entertaining for some; however, others believe that the show’s controversy lies in its credibility. Questioning the validity of the show, many say that while American Idol weeds out thousands of contestants, the results are less than worthwhile. Another popular claim is that the show is merely “reality TV,” while “real” musical artists have to work for their fame.

Recently, a survey was conducted between 76 people of all types of gender, race, age, and education. Over 90% of the respondents said that they had seen the television show American Idol, and only 12% said they did not enjoy the show. Clay Aiken and Kelly Clarkson came in a dead tie as America’s favorite idols, with 42% of the votes each. Coming in next was Ruben Studdard, with a mere 8%. While 72% of all people surveyed believed that contestants from the show are successful musical artists, only 47% said that the contestants were talented – almost split down the middle.

“I am a huge fan of [American Idol],” says fifty-six year old Merica Merck. “I root for my favorites and hope they win, but at the end of the day it’s really just a bunch of teenagers competing to be entertainers…not necessarily musical artists.” Eighteen-year-old Kyle Farris has a similar view. “I think the artists that are made from the show have an effect on the musical industry, but only in a minimalistic way. The artists from the show only make a very small portion of the very big name superstars." Still, some fans are in between. "[The show] picks contestants that have real musical ability," says eighteen-year-old Amanda Westerhouse. "But just because they win doesn't mean that they'll automatically make it in the music business."

There are some, however, who view Idol as more than simply a “glorified talent show,” i.e., they believe that it is an intense competition with incredibly talented musical artists trying to make their potential careers shine. “I see American Idol indirectly helping the musical industry,” says seventeen-year-old David Pandich, “because it demonstrates to the average citizen that the path [to stardom], though difficult, is not insurmountable, and because of this, I believe that more potential stars will feel comfortable making the leap of faith to stardom.” Nineteen-year-old Tyler Teachworth agrees with David, saying, “[It’s] one of the single most entertaining television programs being broadcast today. Whether you're watching Simon slam potential contestants or feeling your heart melt as you listen to some of the most beautiful voices of this day and age, it's fantastic."

Regardless of what people think of the show’s contributions to the music industry, one thing is certain – the show itself is successful. American Idol owes that success to Simon Fuller (not to be confused with judge Simon Cowell) who also created the original United Kingdom counterpart Pop Idol. Pop Idol followed a very similar formula to the first season of American Idol. At the beginning of each season, the episodes focus on individual U.S. cities while thousands of potentials audition. Each contestant goes through preliminary judging rounds before they advance to the star judges: Randy Jackson, Simon Cowell, and Paula Abdul. In the initial weeks, contestants face the judges individually and in groups, singing their hearts out – the judges advance the best contestants. Those who do not advance receive the sharpest and most poignant criticism from the three judges – Simon is notorious for crushing people’s dreams. However, unlike Star Search and similar clones, the audience ultimately decides who wins via phone-based voting.

What does it all mean? Simply put, people agree that American Idol contestants are successful, but many believe that they are not talented. This would indicate a trend towards the belief that the show is merely an overly publicized and highly dramatic talent show without merit. Perhaps this FOX prime time show is more than a popular culture trend. Until further investigation, we won’t know just how good the current Idol’s are, and, more importantly, if they are here to stay. Unfortunately, perhaps David Pandich has it pinned: “I believe that American Idol contributes to the industry,” David says, “but not necessarily by allowing singers to take a shortcut to the top. Regardless of the talent of the Clay Aikens, the Kelly Clarksons, the Ruben Studdards, I don't believe that anyone will ever be able to see these stars as anything other than the product of the show, and they will therefore always be dismissed, if even on a small level, as a novelty act.”