It’s that season again, where experts and reporters get together to talk about how the latest votes will go, and how that will effect the ultimate vote.
I’m not talking about the Presidential Primaries or General Presidential Election. I’m talking about American Idol.
I was reading this article on MSN about David Archuleta’s hopes of winning American Idol this year, and it felt strangely familiar. Didn’t take me long to figure out that the analysis Andy Dehnart does on Archuleta uses the same strategy and analysis I hear and see time and again on the presidential primaries (and especially on the Democrat side, but minus the mudslinging).
Its focus was on strategy and personal appeal of Archuleta, and provides analysis on the viewers in the Idol world (as having short attention spans, so the fact that Archuleta is peaking right now is not a good thing at all), as well as suggesting Archuleta not perform as well as he is capable of so he can “improve”. True points, such. Why should a singer who’s improved dramatically be lauded when their end point may not be as great as the starting point of a great performer? Thus is the problem with Idol, as the article states. It doesn’t highlight talent, it highlights talented drama queens to keep things interesting.
This makes me sad Danny Noriega was sent home. He would have spiced things up.
All said and done, David Archuleta’s got my vote for the primaries, but let’s see how he does in the general elections.