With Adam Lambert Coming Out Boldly, Did American Idol Get Lucky He Lost?

Adam Lambert is finally and officially coming out and showing more of his true colors.

Did American Idol get lucky that Kris Allen won the show? This article takes a look at the Glambert news from a business brand perspective: tinyurl.com/lgaf4w

Adam Lambert is out this week and showing more of his true same-sex colors. So, did American Idol get lucky that K. Allen won the show?

Here’s an interesting article that says the show probably did get lucky that Adam isn’t its public spokesperson for the year: tinyurl.com/lgaf4w

Lambert “coming out” was like Archbishop Weakland “coming out”. The only one who was shocked was the media.

In his recent inteview in Rolling Stone magazine, he said that the idea to do Idol came to him in the midst of a drug trip at the Burning Man festival. Sounds like a great role model. :rolleyes:

lol very well said :thumbsup:

I think they sort of got lucky. Not counting a few song lyrics and a little writhing, Adam has carried himself really well throughout the season. It’s the fact that there is enough of him online from the past that is definitely lacking in class that is the problem. If it was all a thing of the past, it probably wouldn’t be a big deal in this day and age. But the fact that he has been blatantly unbothered by having pics like these online makes me wonder if we’re going to be subjected to more public displays of ickyness (which, btw, would bother me if it was hetero-ickyness too).

OTOH, they’re pushing him pretty heavily still (you don’t ever hear the AI people mention Kris without giving just as much lipservice to Adam), and he’s signed with their agency, so I’m not sure Kris winning really has caused them to avoid that image.

For the record, I’m glad Kris one. :slight_smile:

I don’t think American Idol is about providing role models to youth, although some of the winners have turned out that way; e.g., Carrie Underwood, Jordin Sparks.

And some aren’t role models at all. Our favorite, Taylor Hicks, is hardly appealing to youth; he’s a singer for grown-ups.

The show is about providing singers to the world.

Adam Lambert was our favorite all the way through the season. He’s a rocker, not a balladeer or a folk singer or a pop singer or a country singer. He’ll do rock, hopefully glam rock, and those of us who like rock will enjoy him. I hope he manages to revive this genre of music.

As for his being gay, well, I hope none of you have The Lion King in your library of movies. Or any Rock Hudson movie. Or I hope you don’t watch that show, How I Met Your Mother, or re-runs of Doogie Howser.

I have heard estimates that about half of the actors, singers, etc. that we see are gay. I know a lot of CAFers don’t watch any entertainment at all, and that’s just wonderful (I’m not sure why they would be on this thread). But I think most of you DO enjoy music, television, movies, etc., and you know that their sexuality doesn’t make any difference in their talent. We all have sins that we struggle with. So do they, and practicing homosexual sex just happens to shock many of us more than sins like gossip, jealousy, coveting, prejudice, impure thoughts, failure to honor God fully, etc.

I used to muse that the reason some homosexual artists (musicians, writers, etc) were so great is because they weren’t socially accepted and had to find an outlet for all that energy and that now that it’s mainstream, they won’t have the angst to bring that all out.

That’s an interesting theory and it makes sense.

My personal theory is that many heterosexual people who would be very creative in the arts and entertainment world (or the world of figure skating!) do not enter that world or allow their children to enter that world because they are afraid of homosexuals. It’s really too bad.

My daughter is a professional stage manager, BTW.

I think the thing that makes AI more affected by this is that it markets itself (the tv show in particular) as “for the family.” Families with young children watch it together, and even the young ones vote. My family doesn’t do the voting, but my 6yo is a big fan of Adam. My kids are pretty insulated from all of the entertainment news (aside from the actual tv show, they only know what I tell them about the AI singers), but most kids are not. And the reality of this sort of entertainment is that with so many young children watching, and with the whole concept of “plucking stars out of obscurity” the singers do become role models for kids, perhaps more so than singers who are already famous or who aren’t on tv during the “family hour.” And as a parent, I’m eager to find that show with a star my kids can truly look up to that we can watch together. So I think ratings could easily go down for AI if they lose their wholesomeness appeal. It seems to me that Adam, while he pushed the limits in his music, maintained a pretty wholesome appeal with his off-stage persona during the course of the show. If that turns out to be an act, and if he becomes publically raunchy soon, it could even potentially hurt tour sales (considering the age of the people who like to go to these things.) I personally think he’s too smart to cause that problem so soon, but I do think it makes sense that AI would want to aim for that G-rated appeal.

This is all certainly very reasonable.

I would like to add a few opposing thoughts, though.

I think that AI is concerned that the music industry doesn’t take the show seriously. My daughter informs me that there is quite a controversy over “Idols on Broadway,” because the regular Broadway stars do not feel that these Idol singers have much talent, and that they haven’t “paid their dues” by moving up through the ranks, and that they are changing and even ruining Broadway.

So it could be that AI is attempting to “up the level” of musical talent on the show by courting more singers like Adam Lambert, who was already a professional singer doing concerts, and was already accepted and respected by the industry as someone who had “paid his dues,” but hadn’t broken into the big-time.

I’m wondering if failing record sales of some of the Idols is forcing the show to court more potentially-profitable singers. Only a few of the Idols have really reached high levels of sales, while others (like my favorite, Taylor Hicks) kind of dink along (I buy his albums!). Although having a “controversial” singer like Lambert on the show may drive away some of hte the “family” audience, I think that having winners who do not fulfil sales expectations will hurt the show even more. The show will develop a reputation of being a “Singers’ Graveyard,” and truly talented singers will avoid it like the plague. Then we’ll see a crop of mediocre pop-wedding-church singers who really don’t have the chops to make it in the entertainment industry (I personally feel that Kris Allen is such a singer, but we’ll see, won’t we?!)

I don’t see it that way. There’s an age limit at American Idol (16-28) and the show definitely seems marketed to the Hannah Montana/Jonas Brothers demo, even though people of all ages enjoy it. We all know that talent can be discovered at any age, just look at Paul Potts (38) and Susan Boyle (48), so if Idol was simply about talent and nothing else, it would be more like Britain’s Got Talent.

I think this is a fair assessment. AI is likely more concerned with staying relevant and credible within the music industry than they are with being “family-friendly.” The last Idol contestant who really hit it big was Chris Daughtry, and that was 3+ years ago (and he didn’t even win that season). It only makes sense that they want to bring in people that have the potential to be another Kelly Clarkson or Clay Aiken. As soon as they (as you so aptly put it) “develop a reputation of being a ‘Singers’ Graveyard’”, the show will no longer be profitable. That would be their death knell far more so than losing any perceived family-friendly image.

Personally, I never thought of the show as particularly family-oriented given Simon’s rather blunt and colorful criticisms and the contestants’ oft revealling attire. Maybe that’s just me. :shrug:

C’mon, are you going to sit there and tell me the whole thing **isn’t **contrived? Give me a break. These decisions are made behind closed doors by the producers. For all we know, even some of the auditions are probably fakes, or at least tweaked for entertainment purposes. How would we know? I can’t believe people are still so gullible.

I’m not sure what “decisions” you are referring to that are made behind closed doors or who is being gullible. Could you elaborate?

Up until the final showdown, the judges obviously make the call. They have certain types,they choose to continue: female country singer, a Pat Benatar rebel type, like the nurse from Indiana, etc. They seem to favor males who sing and look like females. They always have the nerdy type who looks like he or she’s gonna make it. Just enough to get the gossip going. That young man everyone so nastily called “Chicken Little” is a perfect example. Those they think they can shape into a specific type-cast go through.

Those they can’t control, or, those they don’t want to market, somehow get dumped. But not until they are ready to dump them. To this day, I think that Mandisa was the best they’ve had. She was dumped because she was too fat for them. And, I am still suspect that she would not comply with something they wanted, say, a certain song, or certain outfit.

When it comes to the audience voting? They make it sound legit., but, there have been a few, as mentioned above, that seemed too crafted. TV would make it possible, and the history of show-biz makes it probable that sort of thing has been going on. And, I happen to believe there is more of that than meets the eye.

The point of all of this is that, Adam Lambert was brought to that position, not by audience votes, but by contrivance. Why he won or lost could be debated. Maybe they wanted him to be the “victim”. Maybe they were afraid they would lose viewership if someone so obvious was chosen. Who knows why? I just believe it had more to do with the producers spinning it, than any real choice on the part of the audience. I could be wrong. I don’t think so, but, oh well. It’s all nonsense anyway.

So you’re saying you believe the voting is rigged? I’ve no doubt that the producers and judges of AI do everything in their power to make good TV and put through people they want to see put through. I’m sure they “creatively edit” the auditions for TV, pick the judges’ comments carefully and even actively seek out people to audition for the show, all in an effort to steer the whole thing in the direction they want it to go. After all, up until the top 24 (or 36), the selection of contestants is completely up to AI. So, of course, they always do seem to have those types of singers you describe every single season.

But to think they rig the voting just seems a little to “conspiracy theorist” for my tastes. Doesn’t a third party company tabulate the votes? In the past, they’ve had the AI winners who are very successful (Kelly Clarkson, Carrie Underwood), they’ve had runner-ups who have out-sold the winner that season (Clay Aiken), they’ve even had fourth place contestants out-sell the winners that season (Chris Daughtry) and seventh place contestants win Academy Awards (Jennifer Hudson). To me, there doesn’t seem to be much rhyme or reason or any tried-and-true recipe for future success based on who wins or doesn’t win.

Can you imagine the backlash if it was uncovered that the entire voting process was completely fraudulent? Why would they risk that?

Maybe I’m just too gullible, though. :wink:

My view would hardly fit the definition of a conspiracy theory. I think if you don’t believe they manipulate the results the way they want them to go, that is being a bit naive. I think dirty deeds have been done to some of these people. It is not publicized, because I am sure they are sworn to secrecy when they sign the contracts.

Yes, I think these things are rigged. OK, the contestants are authentically chosen from the population. Perhaps the silly auditions are real, and there is no need to fake it, but… I have little doubt it is all carefully choreographed, and changed when needed.

I wouldn’t mind, except they don’t seem to have any problem humiliating people for entertainment. Take that young man who bragged about supposedly being a “virgin”. At that point, I started to take offense. Didn’t you notice how it has become more and more bizarre, humiliating and embarrasssing, as well as nasty, as the seasons progress? The contestants dress more weirdly (and immodestly), the characterizations more pointed? Perhaps I am old, because I can see how it is detrimental to the psyche, particularly young people still in the formative stage. You must be numb to all of that. You havenn’t noticed the subtleties.

Let’s face it, Simon Cowell is a sleaze ball. He probably “parties” with certain girls (you can see him drooling over some of them), and if they refuse him they are out. I have no doubt about it. I hate to be cynical, but, let’s face it, the world is like that. I can’t help but think how negatively affected these kids’ lives are once they return home. Obviously you think this is a nice, wholesome, upstanding show because that’s what they want you to think. But, you have to read between the lines. The devil is in the details, as they say.

What's Adam Lambert up to these days?

[quote="Siddhartha, post:19, topic:157517"]
What's Adam Lambert up to these days?

[/quote]

Being vulgar to get attention:

forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=400322

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.