I would rather see a great movie. listen to music, read a book, see a museum exhibit than watch Survivor, American Idol, etc. Just my choice and speaking only for myself.
But there are interesting things on TV like Rick Steves’ travel programs, documentaries, good flicks, and much more. I like to channel surf until something worthwhile, interesting or educational, news or political commentary shows up.

The show is a contest to find a POP singer -which by definition is a category of singers with a definite shelf life. If you don’t care for pop singing, don’t watch the show. But why waste the time and emotion about the fact that other people watch and enjoy and the show? Its like getting upset because someone else likes sherbet and you only like ice cream. Who cares?

I DO know what is going on in Irag as do my friends and aquaintances.

We CAN choose to be intelligent, interesting people. These pop culture mirrors of our lowest common denominator will always be around (Gerry Springer anyone?) but that doesn’t mean we have to pay attention.

The lowest common denominator, intelligence-wise, is a huge percentage of our population.

Let them have Idol and chain resaurants and Entertainment Tonight. There are so many stupid people but that doesn’t mean we have to be part of that.

If you are interested in things that are more important and more stimulating, get involved in them. This low-brow crap that most Americans like doesn’t need to be the default setting.

I mean come on, most people get their news from a comedian!!!!!…what do we expect?

First, I *love*, love, LOVE Ella Fitzgerald. My favorite American singer of all time.

Second, it’s no fair comparing us mortals to a prodigy.

For 0.05% of the population who are born stars, can sing in their showers for years, show up at an amateur show, a just be the star they were meant to be, fine. For the rest of us–and this includes excellent people are just not prodigies, we have to go to practice and work at it.

There is this odd tension in the show. On the one hand, it implies that you can be plucked from the streets with little to no experience, and you can blossom into the star you were born to be in a matter of a month or two. B.S.!

On the other hand, if you listen to the comments of the judges (other than Abdul), it’s clear that performing is a lot like any other profession that skews toward the young (in my Life Consultation, I use Olympic Athlete as the ultimate example of a profession that skews young). You express an interest early. You get coaching and training. You work really hard to develop your skills. And you deliver daily, in a professional manner. (Half of the comments in the try outs have to do with professionalism, not raw talent.)

I do miss the seventies/eighties ethic in pop/rock music that the idea was to join a band, play clubs, pay your dues, and, if you connect with a wider audience, cut a recording deal. I really liked that “go out and perform a while to pay your dues” approach. I can’t stand this “sing in your shower for 20 years and then expect to be crowned the star you’ve always been.” Blech!

But in the end for me, Adam was too much of an over-the-top performer for my tastes. His shrill shrieking was intolerable to listen to. When he sang quiet, I thought he was great, but that was only rarely. In the end, I believe Chris received the Danny vote. Most people preferred Chris’s singing over Adam’s shrieking.

geesh, gay people being catty and taking their pop culture way too seriously – now there’s something new and unexpected!

how ’bout writing a real article next time and save the rants for your diary. this isn’t real news or even a real op ed entertainment piece.