Again, there's no evidence whatsoever even that the budget is unequally distributed among the acts. It's pure conjecture. It's one thing to say that you believe, it's another to suggest it's an indubitable fact. I'm not saying it definitely doesn't happen I'm just seeing at as extremely unlikely. Having met someone who worked on the show as a runner on the X Factor and Xtra Factor (he's now on Strictly). I don't know him very well but he was on the show long enough to get a feel for there being manipulations. There is stuff that we definitely don't see and the judge's comments aren't 100% their own all the time, but I don't believe there are massive biases towards certain acts winning and there is zero evidence for the claim that there is. People believe all sorts. People believe that their web data is being watched by the illuminati. It's an odd world.
X Factor Rigged? No, Probably Not
2 of 2
It's "rigged" in the sense that Simon Cowell doesn't give two shits about who win. He already knows which act he sees as the best prospect for profit regardless of where they finish. The issue of who "wins" is just a gimmick designed to get people to phone and vote. Does anyone seriously think that if Honey G wins, his record label will really spend that much time and money promoting her?
Originally Posted by Virtuoso:
“Again, there's no evidence whatsoever even that the budget is unequally distributed among the acts. It's pure conjecture. It's one thing to say that you believe, it's another to suggest it's an indubitable fact. I'm not saying it definitely doesn't happen I'm just seeing at as extremely unlikely. Having met someone who worked on the show as a runner on the X Factor and Xtra Factor (he's now on Strictly). I don't know him very well but he was on the show long enough to get a feel for there being manipulations. There is stuff that we definitely don't see and the judge's comments aren't 100% their own all the time, but I don't believe there are massive biases towards certain acts winning and there is zero evidence for the claim that there is. People believe all sorts. People believe that their web data is being watched by the illuminati. It's an odd world.”
“Again, there's no evidence whatsoever even that the budget is unequally distributed among the acts. It's pure conjecture. It's one thing to say that you believe, it's another to suggest it's an indubitable fact. I'm not saying it definitely doesn't happen I'm just seeing at as extremely unlikely. Having met someone who worked on the show as a runner on the X Factor and Xtra Factor (he's now on Strictly). I don't know him very well but he was on the show long enough to get a feel for there being manipulations. There is stuff that we definitely don't see and the judge's comments aren't 100% their own all the time, but I don't believe there are massive biases towards certain acts winning and there is zero evidence for the claim that there is. People believe all sorts. People believe that their web data is being watched by the illuminati. It's an odd world.”
That's obvious, what with the show being Cowell's tool to find acts to try and sign to his label. As for the underlined bit, maybe not winning, but just to try and get them to the final night. Yes, it's all just guessing, but it could be the case because the show is Cowell's tool for finding acts for his label. Nothing against that really.
Originally Posted by Big Boy Barry:
“It's "rigged" in the sense that Simon Cowell doesn't give two shits about who win. He already knows which act he sees as the best prospect for profit regardless of where they finish. The issue of who "wins" is just a gimmick designed to get people to phone and vote. Does anyone seriously think that if Honey G wins, his record label will really spend that much time and money promoting her?”
“It's "rigged" in the sense that Simon Cowell doesn't give two shits about who win. He already knows which act he sees as the best prospect for profit regardless of where they finish. The issue of who "wins" is just a gimmick designed to get people to phone and vote. Does anyone seriously think that if Honey G wins, his record label will really spend that much time and money promoting her?”
Obviously every winner won't be suitable.
Originally Posted by Virtuoso:
“Again, there's no evidence whatsoever even that the budget is unequally distributed among the acts. It's pure conjecture. It's one thing to say that you believe, it's another to suggest it's an indubitable fact. I'm not saying it definitely doesn't happen I'm just seeing at as extremely unlikely. Having met someone who worked on the show as a runner on the X Factor and Xtra Factor (he's now on Strictly). I don't know him very well but he was on the show long enough to get a feel for there being manipulations. There is stuff that we definitely don't see and the judge's comments aren't 100% their own all the time, but I don't believe there are massive biases towards certain acts winning and there is zero evidence for the claim that there is. People believe all sorts. People believe that their web data is being watched by the illuminati. It's an odd world.”
“Again, there's no evidence whatsoever even that the budget is unequally distributed among the acts. It's pure conjecture. It's one thing to say that you believe, it's another to suggest it's an indubitable fact. I'm not saying it definitely doesn't happen I'm just seeing at as extremely unlikely. Having met someone who worked on the show as a runner on the X Factor and Xtra Factor (he's now on Strictly). I don't know him very well but he was on the show long enough to get a feel for there being manipulations. There is stuff that we definitely don't see and the judge's comments aren't 100% their own all the time, but I don't believe there are massive biases towards certain acts winning and there is zero evidence for the claim that there is. People believe all sorts. People believe that their web data is being watched by the illuminati. It's an odd world.”
Your 'friend' would have been subject to a strict gagging contract just like contestants are so assuming he/she wanted to continue their career in TV they'd have been most unlikely to say anything especially to someone they "don't know very well"
People are being too tunnel visioned here.
There are so many reasons why the show is so scripted and the results manipulated and who Syco sign is likely not at the top of the priority list. XF tour ticket sales and advertising revenue are more likely to be key factors.
Just for example if Talk Talk are the main sponsor and extensive research has shown their target market to be woman between 25 and 30 then the number of viewers in that demographic will be far more important to them than the overall number of viewers and how much the sponsorship deal is worth will likely reflect that.
Everyone is trying to find reasons why or why not that are just too simple and straight forward when the truth is actually much more complex
Originally Posted by Nissl:
“Ella and James were the two horses they were on that season, so they had to pick one when they wound up against each other. Rylan was supposed to go that week. He knew the score so well as the novelty act for that season that he actually got upset he knocked her out afterwards. These days they are pimping the novelty acts further, perhaps as a point of differentiation with The Voice. (Not sure it's a good strategy tbh.)
Tamera was supposed to be the star in Sam's year but just couldn't get it together, and eventually they gave up. Meanwhile in Fleur's year they pushed her but she couldn't overcome Ben. They don't always get their winner, but if not then they want to make absolutely sure they get their top prospect to the final. This is where the negative manipulation comes in. It's hard to pimp an act beyond a certain point if they don't fit the optimal vote-getting profile, but it's very easy to undercut a few other acts per show to make sure they slide under them and keep them in.
BTW I wouldn't expect to see much of that next week, as there's a clear B3 that are probably a mile away from the category alphas (Matt/Emily/5AM/Honey G) in the vote. Might as well give them all decent treatment so they put on a good show”
“Ella and James were the two horses they were on that season, so they had to pick one when they wound up against each other. Rylan was supposed to go that week. He knew the score so well as the novelty act for that season that he actually got upset he knocked her out afterwards. These days they are pimping the novelty acts further, perhaps as a point of differentiation with The Voice. (Not sure it's a good strategy tbh.)
Tamera was supposed to be the star in Sam's year but just couldn't get it together, and eventually they gave up. Meanwhile in Fleur's year they pushed her but she couldn't overcome Ben. They don't always get their winner, but if not then they want to make absolutely sure they get their top prospect to the final. This is where the negative manipulation comes in. It's hard to pimp an act beyond a certain point if they don't fit the optimal vote-getting profile, but it's very easy to undercut a few other acts per show to make sure they slide under them and keep them in.
BTW I wouldn't expect to see much of that next week, as there's a clear B3 that are probably a mile away from the category alphas (Matt/Emily/5AM/Honey G) in the vote. Might as well give them all decent treatment so they put on a good show”
BIB, I'm gonna take a bet that one of Emily or Honey G will go in there on Disco night, Emily's support is already looking like it's going down after Creep.
[quote=mimik1uk;84488546]i think its as much incompetence as manipulation, bear in mind the people supposedly doing the manipulation are the ones picking the terrible themes and keep re-using the same songs year after year after year
do we really think brian friedman does staging as a manipulation or is he just a bit crazy and tends to go OTT ?
i've no doubt there is some attempts at influencing things but come on this is a TV show, if they were capable of manipulating things to the extent they are accused of then i would think they would be clever enough to recognise the inherent flaws in the show as well
main reason i dont think its as heavily manipulated as people say it must be is because every week we get fans of every act accusing the producers of throwing their favourite under the bus or giving preferential treatment to anyone who they see as a threat to their favourite
at the end of the day its easier to blame the show for sabotaging someone they like than just accept they weren't very popular[/QUOTE]
BIB, they might not be very popular due to the songs being given out? It's just a thought.
do we really think brian friedman does staging as a manipulation or is he just a bit crazy and tends to go OTT ?
i've no doubt there is some attempts at influencing things but come on this is a TV show, if they were capable of manipulating things to the extent they are accused of then i would think they would be clever enough to recognise the inherent flaws in the show as well
main reason i dont think its as heavily manipulated as people say it must be is because every week we get fans of every act accusing the producers of throwing their favourite under the bus or giving preferential treatment to anyone who they see as a threat to their favourite
at the end of the day its easier to blame the show for sabotaging someone they like than just accept they weren't very popular[/QUOTE]
BIB, they might not be very popular due to the songs being given out? It's just a thought.
[quote=big bang theory;84492409]
Exactly it's the journey that XF show of a contestant which largely dictates if they are or become popular with the public or not!
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“i think its as much incompetence as manipulation, bear in mind the people supposedly doing the manipulation are the ones picking the terrible themes and keep re-using the same songs year after year after year
do we really think brian friedman does staging as a manipulation or is he just a bit crazy and tends to go OTT ?
i've no doubt there is some attempts at influencing things but come on this is a TV show, if they were capable of manipulating things to the extent they are accused of then i would think they would be clever enough to recognise the inherent flaws in the show as well
main reason i dont think its as heavily manipulated as people say it must be is because every week we get fans of every act accusing the producers of throwing their favourite under the bus or giving preferential treatment to anyone who they see as a threat to their favourite
at the end of the day its easier to blame the show for sabotaging someone they like than just accept they weren't very popular[/QUOTE]
BIB, they might not be very popular due to the songs being given out? It's just a thought.”
“i think its as much incompetence as manipulation, bear in mind the people supposedly doing the manipulation are the ones picking the terrible themes and keep re-using the same songs year after year after year
do we really think brian friedman does staging as a manipulation or is he just a bit crazy and tends to go OTT ?
i've no doubt there is some attempts at influencing things but come on this is a TV show, if they were capable of manipulating things to the extent they are accused of then i would think they would be clever enough to recognise the inherent flaws in the show as well
main reason i dont think its as heavily manipulated as people say it must be is because every week we get fans of every act accusing the producers of throwing their favourite under the bus or giving preferential treatment to anyone who they see as a threat to their favourite
at the end of the day its easier to blame the show for sabotaging someone they like than just accept they weren't very popular[/QUOTE]
BIB, they might not be very popular due to the songs being given out? It's just a thought.”
Exactly it's the journey that XF show of a contestant which largely dictates if they are or become popular with the public or not!
Originally Posted by Virtuoso:
“Again, there's no evidence whatsoever even that the budget is unequally distributed among the acts. It's pure conjecture. It's one thing to say that you believe, it's another to suggest it's an indubitable fact. I'm not saying it definitely doesn't happen I'm just seeing at as extremely unlikely. Having met someone who worked on the show as a runner on the X Factor and Xtra Factor (he's now on Strictly). I don't know him very well but he was on the show long enough to get a feel for there being manipulations. There is stuff that we definitely don't see and the judge's comments aren't 100% their own all the time, but I don't believe there are massive biases towards certain acts winning and there is zero evidence for the claim that there is. People believe all sorts. People believe that their web data is being watched by the illuminati. It's an odd world.”
“Again, there's no evidence whatsoever even that the budget is unequally distributed among the acts. It's pure conjecture. It's one thing to say that you believe, it's another to suggest it's an indubitable fact. I'm not saying it definitely doesn't happen I'm just seeing at as extremely unlikely. Having met someone who worked on the show as a runner on the X Factor and Xtra Factor (he's now on Strictly). I don't know him very well but he was on the show long enough to get a feel for there being manipulations. There is stuff that we definitely don't see and the judge's comments aren't 100% their own all the time, but I don't believe there are massive biases towards certain acts winning and there is zero evidence for the claim that there is. People believe all sorts. People believe that their web data is being watched by the illuminati. It's an odd world.”
You can't have watched the show last year then. The show was desperate to drag Louisa to the win and it was laughably obvious.
Originally Posted by Nissl:
“Just want to toss in that I think the fundamental reason it winds up so manipulated is because XF is still actually trying to produce viable pop acts (unlike The Voice) and the public who watches XF doesn't vote for what will actually sell after the show. They tend to vote for technical excellence and a nice personality. They don't vote for interesting, they don't vote for star power, and they don't adjust for age differences.”
“Just want to toss in that I think the fundamental reason it winds up so manipulated is because XF is still actually trying to produce viable pop acts (unlike The Voice) and the public who watches XF doesn't vote for what will actually sell after the show. They tend to vote for technical excellence and a nice personality. They don't vote for interesting, they don't vote for star power, and they don't adjust for age differences.”
Reggie & Bollie, Jedward, Rylan, Honey G?
The public vote for who they are told are talented & nice. This doesn't readily fit in with the truth.
As I always point out:
Louis: "Little Mix like to chose their own songs and clothes. They are such good role models for young girls."
Louis: "Janet wants to choose her own songs and clothes. She can be very difficult to work with."
It's very easy to create perceptions in the minds of the viewers.
Originally Posted by drakhen:
“I don’t think there will ever be proper evidence, unless somebody who’s worked on the show decides to go to the press or does a tell-all book. I think most of the people who think the show is manipulated to some degree believe that there are several favoured acts and not just one (with the exception of last year). There is usually one favoured male, female, group and "joke" act. I'm not sure if that's even manipulation, but wanting to have a lineup of contestants that makes good TV.
The producers’ priorities also probably change as the series progresses. You mentioned Laura White above and I think her one is a good example. She was clearly a favourite initially but apart from the 1st live show, she didn’t do well in the voting. Suddenly the negative comments from Simon started about her appearance. Diana Vickers was also intended as a priority act, but she suddenly started getting negative comments as well from Louis and Simon at the same time as stories about her being difficult surfaced in the press. Anyway, this is all just my interpretation.”
“I don’t think there will ever be proper evidence, unless somebody who’s worked on the show decides to go to the press or does a tell-all book. I think most of the people who think the show is manipulated to some degree believe that there are several favoured acts and not just one (with the exception of last year). There is usually one favoured male, female, group and "joke" act. I'm not sure if that's even manipulation, but wanting to have a lineup of contestants that makes good TV.
The producers’ priorities also probably change as the series progresses. You mentioned Laura White above and I think her one is a good example. She was clearly a favourite initially but apart from the 1st live show, she didn’t do well in the voting. Suddenly the negative comments from Simon started about her appearance. Diana Vickers was also intended as a priority act, but she suddenly started getting negative comments as well from Louis and Simon at the same time as stories about her being difficult surfaced in the press. Anyway, this is all just my interpretation.”
It may be possible to make a case by going through the videos and pulling out key manipulations.
For instance calling someone dull and changing their staging from a golden glow in week one to grey and lifeless in their final week, then showing the gradual changes from week to week, to show it was done deliberately. Then back it up with the song choices, VT, judge's comments etc could be enough to build a case.
I always point out Janet Devlin as someone like Christopher Maloney was hated on by the show from the start, but their was an obvious change in Janet's treatment over the course of the show.
Plus things like how Janet was treated for forgetting the words to Little Mix forgetting the words and singing out of time would show a bias from the show.
It is rigged that's why the viewers have fallen from 16.5 million in 2010 to 6 million now. People see it and give up.
It's fixed, Apps stop working to help favoured contestants, and contestants have reported knowing they are going home on Saturday nit Sunday and the vote hadn't finished.
Random selkection gets fright night on Halloween, that's very random, even Simon Cowell last weekend said it's s fix and was told off by Dermot.
The six million left seem not to notice the fixing, ten million And have stopped watching.
It's fixed, Apps stop working to help favoured contestants, and contestants have reported knowing they are going home on Saturday nit Sunday and the vote hadn't finished.
Random selkection gets fright night on Halloween, that's very random, even Simon Cowell last weekend said it's s fix and was told off by Dermot.
The six million left seem not to notice the fixing, ten million And have stopped watching.
Originally Posted by Thiswillbefun:
“I always point out Janet Devlin as someone like Christopher Maloney was hated on by the show from the start, but their was an obvious change in Janet's treatment over the course of the show.
Plus things like how Janet was treated for forgetting the words to Little Mix forgetting the words and singing out of time would show a bias from the show.”
“I always point out Janet Devlin as someone like Christopher Maloney was hated on by the show from the start, but their was an obvious change in Janet's treatment over the course of the show.
Plus things like how Janet was treated for forgetting the words to Little Mix forgetting the words and singing out of time would show a bias from the show.”
I agree Janet is a good example of the manipulation on the show. The things that she was initially praised for by the judges were later made out to be negatives. Sofabet (who I think sometimes go overboard) wrote a very good article about Janet's treatment on the show and how she went from topping the vote for the 1st four weeks to being booted out before the final.
Originally Posted by drakhen:
“I agree Janet is a good example of the manipulation on the show. The things that she was initially praised for by the judges were later made out to be negatives. Sofabet (who I think sometimes go overboard) wrote a very good article about Janet's treatment on the show and how she went from topping the vote for the 1st four weeks to being booted out before the final.”
“I agree Janet is a good example of the manipulation on the show. The things that she was initially praised for by the judges were later made out to be negatives. Sofabet (who I think sometimes go overboard) wrote a very good article about Janet's treatment on the show and how she went from topping the vote for the 1st four weeks to being booted out before the final.”
or alternatively she had a massive hype after her first audition so had a ready made support for when the lives started
she then ranged from pretty mediocre to dreadful on the live shows, people gave her the benefit of the doubt for the first few weeks based on her audition but when she failed to reproduce that sort of performance eventually just stopped voting for her
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“or alternatively she has a massive hype after her first audition so had a ready made support for when the lives started
she then ranged from pretty mediocre to dreadful on the live shows, people gave her the benefit of the doubt for the first few weeks based on her audition but when she failed to reproduce that sort of performance eventually just stopped voting for her”
“or alternatively she has a massive hype after her first audition so had a ready made support for when the lives started
she then ranged from pretty mediocre to dreadful on the live shows, people gave her the benefit of the doubt for the first few weeks based on her audition but when she failed to reproduce that sort of performance eventually just stopped voting for her”
Do you honestly think that the show thought that Janet would pull off MmmBop?
That year had a few dodgy song choices handed out to acts to humiliate them for their preferred final two, Craig Colton Licence To Kill, Janet nearly every week apart from week 1 & 7 & Under The Bridge, Misha B with Tainted Love and Girls Just Wanna Have Fun, Kitty the week she went, these are just prime examples of if they want an act to win and there's acts in the way that could stop them they'll give out obscene song choices to the rivals that if they was given the right song choices they would compete.
Originally Posted by mimik1uk:
“or alternatively she had a massive hype after her first audition so had a ready made support for when the lives started
she then ranged from pretty mediocre to dreadful on the live shows, people gave her the benefit of the doubt for the first few weeks based on her audition but when she failed to reproduce that sort of performance eventually just stopped voting for her”
“or alternatively she had a massive hype after her first audition so had a ready made support for when the lives started
she then ranged from pretty mediocre to dreadful on the live shows, people gave her the benefit of the doubt for the first few weeks based on her audition but when she failed to reproduce that sort of performance eventually just stopped voting for her”
Except the judges praised her on the first few live shows. The negative comments only started when stories started surfacing in the press that she was being difficult and opinionated. This was also reflected in her VTs. Like I said in an earlier post, I wasn't a fan but some of the comments made by the judges towards Janet were unpleasant. I have no problem with them critiquing a performance but not a contestant's personality.
2 of 2
