Posted:
When talent is just a number of votes
Jaya Drona
[ 29 Sep, 2006 2233hrs ISTTIMES NEWS NETWORK
</>
Jaya Drona
[ 29 Sep, 2006 2233hrs ISTTIMES NEWS NETWORK
</>
Can voting be the be all and end all of choosing the best participant in a talent hunt show.
This is democracy at its best. Forget the politicians, even the next biggest thing – whether it is in singing, acting or dancing – is also chosen by the public nowadays, thanks to the talent hunt shows. As everybody from little girls to former screen divas ask you to vote in their support, DT focuses on this talent hunting ka naya funda, which has left most of 'talented' contenders high and dry. So, who wins in this talent vs regional and social bias?
It's not all fair
Candidates from talent shows allege that everything is not what it seems when it comes to voting. Vinit Singh, who lost to Debojit Saha in Sa Re Ga Ma Pa despite being considered more talented of the two, says, "Voting ceases to be sacrosanct when candidate's family start providing free booths to public to cast their votes. Mobile companies in the regions provide free SMS facilities. To check things like this, only one vote per phone should be allowed. Otherwise, it is a battle won or lost, minus the talent."
Adds singer and composer Himesh Reshammiya, "While universal voting is a great way to choose participants, it should be ensured that no voting with regional bias takes place, which is seen usually."
Agrees Rajeswari Sachdev Badola, who participated in a reality show too, "Our voting systems are not monitored. There's no foolproof pattern and the ratio of people voting in one city varies from another. Loopholes like no network coverage in one area etc leave a bitter taste in the mouth. These things need to be watched first."
Big bucks rule
The commercial angle is of prime consideration for the channels and the sponsors. Pooja Bedi, participant of Jhalak Dikhala ja reasons, "The West offers a fairer deal. Phone lines are open for two hours after the show is aired and it is ensured that not more than one vote is registered per calling number. In India, service providers allow any number of votes to be cast. So, if there are a thousand loyalists and they have mobile phones, fairness goes for a six." Rati Agnihotri seconds her opinion, "We miss a transparent monitoring system. I have been voted out of a reality dance show but I don't know anything about the polls. Whatever decision is given, participants have to accept it blindly. I don't know where I stood, all that I know is the judges' verdict."
Gurus share their angst
The judges offer a mixed opinion. Known for her crisp judgements in Nach Baliye, Saroj Khan avers, "Judges have the last say, but we say things technically. Before choosing the right people, it is imperative to be assured of their popularity." But singer Ila Arun begs to differ. "It kills talent," she says, adding, "Reality shows should be based either on voting or on the judges' decision. In Fame Gurukul the panel was shocked when Qazi Tauqeer won. The other contenders are discouraged but keeping the channel happy is more important. People don't understand a reality show, it is all about the desire to win. So showing both healthy and unhealthy competition are a part but when the public votes, the results are shocking."
Ball in the public's court
Debojit Saha feels, "When you repose the responsibility in the public, there shouldn't be further debate. They judge the person and not the talent per se. A lot of hype was created when I was voted the best, putting my votes under the region scanner. I stand by the fact that if your family members don't support you then it's foolish to expect anything from outsiders."😡( bullshit !! ) Indian Idol Abhijeet Sawant reasons, "I don't think voting is justified at times, but I see more advantages than disadvantages here. Popularity that comes by way of voting can do wonders for one's career." Ketki Dave aka Dakhsha explains, "I don't see a flaw in voting. A film's success depends on the public and so do these shows."
This is democracy at its best. Forget the politicians, even the next biggest thing – whether it is in singing, acting or dancing – is also chosen by the public nowadays, thanks to the talent hunt shows. As everybody from little girls to former screen divas ask you to vote in their support, DT focuses on this talent hunting ka naya funda, which has left most of 'talented' contenders high and dry. So, who wins in this talent vs regional and social bias?
It's not all fair
Candidates from talent shows allege that everything is not what it seems when it comes to voting. Vinit Singh, who lost to Debojit Saha in Sa Re Ga Ma Pa despite being considered more talented of the two, says, "Voting ceases to be sacrosanct when candidate's family start providing free booths to public to cast their votes. Mobile companies in the regions provide free SMS facilities. To check things like this, only one vote per phone should be allowed. Otherwise, it is a battle won or lost, minus the talent."
Adds singer and composer Himesh Reshammiya, "While universal voting is a great way to choose participants, it should be ensured that no voting with regional bias takes place, which is seen usually."
Agrees Rajeswari Sachdev Badola, who participated in a reality show too, "Our voting systems are not monitored. There's no foolproof pattern and the ratio of people voting in one city varies from another. Loopholes like no network coverage in one area etc leave a bitter taste in the mouth. These things need to be watched first."
Big bucks rule
The commercial angle is of prime consideration for the channels and the sponsors. Pooja Bedi, participant of Jhalak Dikhala ja reasons, "The West offers a fairer deal. Phone lines are open for two hours after the show is aired and it is ensured that not more than one vote is registered per calling number. In India, service providers allow any number of votes to be cast. So, if there are a thousand loyalists and they have mobile phones, fairness goes for a six." Rati Agnihotri seconds her opinion, "We miss a transparent monitoring system. I have been voted out of a reality dance show but I don't know anything about the polls. Whatever decision is given, participants have to accept it blindly. I don't know where I stood, all that I know is the judges' verdict."
Gurus share their angst
The judges offer a mixed opinion. Known for her crisp judgements in Nach Baliye, Saroj Khan avers, "Judges have the last say, but we say things technically. Before choosing the right people, it is imperative to be assured of their popularity." But singer Ila Arun begs to differ. "It kills talent," she says, adding, "Reality shows should be based either on voting or on the judges' decision. In Fame Gurukul the panel was shocked when Qazi Tauqeer won. The other contenders are discouraged but keeping the channel happy is more important. People don't understand a reality show, it is all about the desire to win. So showing both healthy and unhealthy competition are a part but when the public votes, the results are shocking."
Ball in the public's court
Debojit Saha feels, "When you repose the responsibility in the public, there shouldn't be further debate. They judge the person and not the talent per se. A lot of hype was created when I was voted the best, putting my votes under the region scanner. I stand by the fact that if your family members don't support you then it's foolish to expect anything from outsiders."😡( bullshit !! ) Indian Idol Abhijeet Sawant reasons, "I don't think voting is justified at times, but I see more advantages than disadvantages here. Popularity that comes by way of voting can do wonders for one's career." Ketki Dave aka Dakhsha explains, "I don't see a flaw in voting. A film's success depends on the public and so do these shows."
Current Affairs
