....SO WHAT WENT WRONG???....

SRGMP has become quite controversial in last few days and one has to wonder what went wrong with an otherwise classy show .Since we have been brickbatting amongst ourselves( criticising the so called bad apples and backing our fav singer/mentor) for days now and all that can be said ,has pretty much been said ,somewhere in some thread, i though i would invite discussion on different aspect of the show. what do you think about the following....

1) is the judgement of masses fair and furthermore is the judgement of celebrity judges fair??

most people get swayed with other aspects(looks, attitude, background etc ) of the participants than with sheer talent. this is a killer in almost all reality shows from indian idol, fame gurukul to american idol (arguably bo bice was a more versatile singer than carrie) and nach baliye.also since the method of voting is phone lines , more agressive viewers tend to vote multiple times than the more passive and mature ones. this can tip the result in favour of more popular(vs more talented) singer/dancer/participant. allthis leads to the conclusion that people have a herd mentality and the results cannot be fair , however if the decision is left to the judges, they can end up being partial to a certain participant and tweak the result too. under such circumstances would should be the ideal way to decide.

2) should we know anything about the participant's personal life?

the current trend includes a glimpse of a participants personal life during the show. however this has an impact of biasing the viewers. for example if there are two participants with almost similar calibre and one hails from a middle class family with a very sick mother who wants to see her some succeed(who by the way, left his paying job and took the risk of lifetime by participating) while the other hails from a multimillionaire family and has nothing to worry about, it is a no brainer that most people would support the first one. normally the participant' s family weeps, laughs, puts on an act and makes an impassioned plea for votes, is this really fair. also in last few shows the participants have made an impassioned plea to a certain community( i see it as a cheap attempt to divide otherwise secular and peaceful country) , do you think it is ethical.(to quote a few example... neeru plead with punjabis to back her on nach baliye, sachin concentrated on marathi votes, shilpa is said to have visited lucknow to canvass on the show. similarily debo's assamese background has become much of an issue on the srgmp show).

3) is the format of mentoring by ace directors really sensible??

while this makes for an interesting show, it has also made me sad to see that these extremely talented directors fight like kids on show trying to pull each other down by any possible method. on one hand i can understand thier attitude. some passion and ego in thier temprament is natural(artists feed on passion afterall) , also they work in a very finicky industry where keeping up appearances is important. if a director yields to another, it might be seen as if he is accepting the defeat instead of the fact that he is a mature person showing decency.this might impact his position in the industry and the number of projects coming his way. on the other hand every artist must know that art is about countinuos self renewal and learning. for every bit of talent he has , someone has something a little better . humility and desire to learn are the only things that can ensure his/her survival. what do you guys think.

4) is winning really that important?

is winning really important, these guys have participated and givrn viewers and thier mentors a glimpse of thier talents. even if they do not win , thier mentors and other celebrities on the show can forward thier careers based on thier talent. a certain participant on one on the reality shows had once said that it is better to be second than win on the show. since he is considered almost as good as the winner, but he is not bound by any contracts and can pick any projects he likes. sucess of rahul vaidya's album over abhijeet's album...prithvi's sucess over the winner(who got a contract to do the zee movie) in teleworld in cinestar ki khoj show all further pinpoint this fact.what do you guys think???

5) why do these reality shows create such passion amongst viewers?

a few episodes and most of us are hooked so badly that we start trashing some participants and supporting some. the situation gets so bad that soon we are taking everything said for our favs personally and are slightest bit not hesitating in attacking the people personally ,who like the participants we detest.why do we feel so strongly about someone we don't know or have made a very subjective judgement about him/her

please post your opinions using decent language preferably using english(refrain from using tamil/telegu....etc)

Q)is the judgement of masses fair and furthermore is the judgement of celebrity judges fair??
A)fair is what fair does. what is fair to one is not fair to all. in which case, what majority thinks becomes fair. even in court rooms, nobody talks about what is fair or what is unfair. they only talk about law how best they can do justice without breaking established norms and rules. so, in answer to your question, yes we should be fair to ourselves and at the same time we should expect the organizers to establish some rules. rule#1: same amount of tv exposure to everybody. no more or no less.

Q)should we know anything about the participant's personal life?
A) There's no harm in knowing. Again, one has to be fair in one's mind and heart. You cannot change the basic values of any human. The decision to get influenced or not get influenced by a person's region/looks and other extraneous factors is totally up to the individual. at one point every body makes a conscious, deliberate effort that makes them swing in one's favor. what influenced them to do that? only that person would know.

Q) is the format of mentoring by ace directors really sensible??
A) they add some spice. without them it would probably be a little bland. it's like american idol without simon cowell. may be it would be for the better but ratings wise, i don't know whether that would be a prudent move.

Q) is winning really that important?
A) at some point in life, yes. every competition that you enter? not really.

Q) why do these reality shows create such passion amongst viewers?
A) this is a deep question that human psychologists can better answer. my guess is that people are enticed by drama and they would watch it even to the point of hating themselves for watching it.

Statement: please post your opinions using decent language preferably using english(refrain from using tamil/telegu....etc)
A) yenduku? yake? kyon? kasale?
just kidding !

Kitna sara likha hai..... plizzzz yaar thoda thoda kar ke likha karo...... 😉 😉 😉

I think at least if we follow few things may be it will improve:
1. Don't talk about personal life of anyone.
2. Stop doing these AV where they make it baised.
3. Stop counting Regionwise
4. Mentor of the contestant is not allowed to comment on their own contestant.
5. Mentor does not go to stage, they stay at their seats.
6. May be having min age of contestants be around 20 so their voice & behaviour all are matured.

There may be more things or may be you disagree with me but that's my opinion.

sab kuch fair that except HR..usko nahi laate to sab kuch thik tha....log JL ke comemtns se dukhi hote the lekin man hi man pe unko maante bhi the...........lekin HR ko muh se bhi jut emarne ka man karta hai aur dil se bhi...

Originally posted by: manjujain

I think at least if we follow few things may be it will improve:
1. Don't talk about personal life of anyone.
2. Stop doing these AV where they make it baised.
3. Stop counting Regionwise
4. Mentor of the contestant is not allowed to comment on their own contestant.
5. Mentor does not go to stage, they stay at their seats.
6. May be having min age of contestants be around 20 so their voice & behaviour all are matured.

There may be more things or may be you disagree with me but that's my opinion.

Agree with most of the points except the last one regarding a bar on age. If we keep the limit at 20, then we would miss out on talent like Hema, Nihira, Himani etc.

1) is the judgement of masses fair and furthermore is the judgement of celebrity judges fair??

Have we(indian junta) not shown that we put personal traits over talent 100% of times, well sometimes Judges also go overboard. I think there should be a %ge of votes coming from all the places (guest talent related judges 40%, public 30%, opponent mentors 30%) like Nach Baliye had in its earlier rounds. And for heavens sake, stop giving breakout of regionwise votes, knowledge is good, but we have demonstrated we are not intelligent to use it properly(exhibit SRGMP C2005)

2) should we know anything about the participant's personal life?

There are gossip magazines for that, if I need to know more about their personal life I should be reading that, what is the point of having any positive/negative personal life things on national TV? Everyone has problems in life, these people are talented hence they are on TV, not b'cos their mom died, or dad is sick or he is in love

3) is the format of mentoring by ace directors really sensible??

Yes, it is a great idea, This is where supply meets demand head on, no middle man involved. But somebody Got to explain these directors what a mentor is supposed to be, till what extent it is allowable to go on the show, if you cross the limit, you and all of your contestants are chucked off the show, if any mentor wants to cheerlead, they should only be allowed to do so if they wear pomp-pomps😉

4) is winning really that important?

Not really

This contest is supposed to a (best) talent search, there is no best, there are all contenders to be the best, if it is the best, there can never be a best every year

Instead what the mentors and the contestants should concentrate on is, showcase all the attributes of the talent, opponent mentors should be not only judging they should be forcing the parent mentor to make the contestant learn to diversify, this shows the contestant where he/she is good at and where there is a need to learn

5) why do these reality shows create such passion amongst viewers?

We(Indians) are becoming more and more Idiot Box Centric, either watch cricket on TV, watch TV soaps or TV reality shows, there is nothing else that family members do in their quality time. So this becomes the only passion and TV/Cellular phone companies are preying on us

please post your opinions using decent language preferably using english(refrain from using tamil/telegu....etc)

Hindi chalega?

Jai bolo Bharat Mata ki(aisi hi yaar man kiya isliye ek nara lagaya, chalega na?)

Originally posted by: ChicksDigMe

Agree with most of the points except the last one regarding a bar on age. If we keep the limit at 20, then we would miss out on talent like Hema, Nihira, Himani etc.

I wasn't too sure of last one but the thing which hurts me is many participated in the contest & they missed their one school year so if competition is after school age it will be better, this is just from parental point of view.

1) is the judgement of masses fair and furthermore is the judgement of celebrity judges fair??

VIEWER'S VIEW POINT: If you leave your career in someone else's hands (be it masses or judges), don't expect fairness in the result. You can pursue your career two ways:
Join a reality show and hope to get recognized. Just be prepared for heart-pinching comments/remarks - OR - go door to door and beg for an opportunity and hope someone gives you a break. Again, be ready for disappointment.
Either way, life will not treat you fair. The only think that matters here is your LUCK and your TIMING!
CORPORATE VIEWPOINT: Judgement of masses is a much better idea. This increases the TRP of the show since it makes people more involved, and of course brings in a lot of moolah for us (Channel).

Personally, I think there should be a blend of both. They should do public voting for top three contestants. The weakest one should be eliminated from the ones who are left by neutral set of judges. As competition gets tougher, reduce public voting from top 3 to top 2 and eventually the winner.

2) should we know anything about the participant's personal life?

VIEWER'S VIEW POINT:I have ALWAYS been against this. If the public knows too much about someone, they tend to get emotional. Hell, even a doctor cannot operate on a person they are emotionally attached to, what do you expect from the poor janta.😭
CORPORATE VIEWPOINT: Of course, this is a good idea. The more they (people) know about the contestant, the more involved they are. The more involved they are, the more money they pour into the votes. The more money they put into votes, the more profit we (the channel) make ...

A good blend will be to keep this information short and sweet ...

3) is the format of mentoring by ace directors really sensible??
VIEWER'S VIEW POINT: It will work as long as neutral sets of judges give points based on their performance. If the mentors give out points for their opponent's contestant, the result will never be fair. Also, if the mentors are chosing songs for their own contestants, then that's not fair either. It was not fair for Debu to sing a qawali that was originally sung by 4-5 singers whereas other singers had easier songs in comparison. Judgement can never be fair on these grounds.
CORPORATE VIEWPOINT: Of course it is a great idea .. public loves cat fights. It increases our (Channel's) TRP. The more these mentors humiliate a contestant, the more sympathy votes come in from public.

Personally, I like the format of Indian Idol. Whoever trains these singers are behind the scenes and all we see is a set of 3 (neutral I hope) judges. Although, the points/comments thrown by these judges does make Janta emotional. Maybe they should just let the singers sing on Gala day, and on the day of elimination ... the judges should comment. That way, janta is not sending sympathy votes to the contestants that got humiliated.

4) is winning really that important?
VIEWER'S VIEW POINT: Yes it is important. We (Janta) are obsessed by someone, and we will make sure they win!
CORPORATE VIEWPOINT: We (Channel) just don't care as long as we make money.

Personally, it's not important. Like you mentioned, if you don't win you are not bound to any contract and if you're good, you will get in. I'm sure Shankar Mahadevan was very happy the day Arijit Singh got out, and Anu Malik did not waste any time in getting Rahul Vaidya and Prajakta Shukre to sing in his movie.
&nbs p;
5) why do these reality shows create such passion amongst viewers?
VIEWER'S VIEW POINT: We are obsessed by our favorite singer.
CORPORATE VIEWPOINT: They (Janta) are emotional fools and we (Channel) use their emotions to mint money ...

Indians are passionate and emotional about everything. We are softies and take everything to heart. Ofcourse, the channel is using this to make money, but it is this passion that has kept our culture strong in this day and age. And being an Indian, I am proud to be passionate! 😊

Originally posted by: mademoise11e

<insert everything you said here>

My compliments on some very decent analysis. Impressed me.