How We Media can save us from Britney Spears
Last night while watching the NAACP’s Image Awards, I began thinking about the connections between my personal guilty pleasure, American Idol, and my professional passion, We Media. When the preternaturally talented Jordin Sparks took the stage for an Aretha Franklin tribute, I felt some strange sense of connection with Sparks, the way you feel about someone you went to high school with who is now famous.
Maybe that’s because I did know-her-when: Watching all of American Idol Season Six, I saw Sparks rise from her first audition to her win over beat-box-boy Blake Lewis in Hollywood last spring. In other words, I felt involved in her stardom. And even though I never pick up the phone to vote for Idol contestants (it’s not a civic duty, is it?), I liked Sparks and felt she earned her stardom: America literally did vote her into “office.”
This morning, Britney Spears crossed my mind (I was contemplating working mothers who have breakdowns,) and my first thought was: “Who elected her to be a star?” Then I laughed, remembering that, in fact, entertainment superstars are not elected. All of a sudden that seemed wrong: If you put “unelected” in front of anything — judges, superdelegates — they start to sound a little nefarious.
When I think of Britney Spears prancing around in her sexy school-girl outfit in Baby One More Time I do think she’s somewhat nefarious — especially when compared to the restrained teen-aged beauty of Jordin Sparks.
That’s when I started thinking about We Media: Could it be that when Americans get to vote on their pop stars guided by expert advice,(read: pro-am collaboration,) they choose talented, often-beautiful people but avoid super-sexed icons? Of course there are have various minor scandals about Idol contestants with their breasts bared (poor Antonella Barba discovered the dark side of the connected society,) but when I think about the American Idol winners and runners-up as a group, they are a notably wholesome bunch.
So is there a moral here? That the way to clean up entertainment is to make it participatory? All I know is, when it comes to teen-aged stars, I’d vote for Sparks over Spears any day.
tags:5 Comments so far
Leave a reply
[...] hadn’t dawned on me that America Idol is a good model for journalism until I read this blog item by Andrea Useem at [...]
Since I have to cover “American Idol” and all that is Britney as part of my job (at the CBS entertainment Web site TheShowBuzz.com), I’d like to weigh in here.
First of all, I must note that Britney Spears is no longer a teen-aged star, so I’m going to assume you’re comparing Jordin today to Britney of yesteryear (scary to think of 1999 in those terms, but there it is!) And I have to also point out that Britney’s image and her off-screen behavior have long overshadowed her talent — she actually can sing and pre-Kevin she had charisma.
I don’t like it when teenagers are groomed to look older (and sexier) on stage or on the red carpet (Miley Cyrus at the Grammys? Her stylist should be fired and then, I don’t know, jailed or something.) But once they’re 18, image is a matter of artistic (or commercial) choice. There’s room for the sexy and the wholesome in the music world.
As for “American Idol,” I’ve never seen an overtly sexual contestant in the voting rounds (the wacky auditions don’t count here). I don’t think the producers would allow it in the first place.
In other words, it’s hard to say if the audience is deliberately choosing wholesome contestants because ALL of the contestants once they’re down to the original 24 are pretty much wholesome (even Constantine Maroulis’ attempts at smoldering were strictly PG.)
Although it’s true big radio and major labels offer a limited choice of artists that “we didn’t vote on” we definitely do vote when we choose to buy or not buy their records. Therefore I’d argue that entertainment has always been participatory.
What increases that participation now more than ever are things like digital downloads giving an unlimited variety of choices, indie artists promoting themselves from scratch, bloggers writing about music outside of the standard promotional machine, podcasting, etc. We’re in very exciting times, I think.
What “American Idol” does do is let talented artists like overweight Ruben Studdard or grey-haired Taylor Hicks have a shot at jump-started fame even though they would never get past the lobby of the Sony building because of their looks.
The sad part, though, is that neither of them have been able to turn their “Idol” status into record sales. Where are all those millions of fans who voted for them on the show? Watching the new season?
The most successful Idol so far (based on record sales and awards) is Carrie Underwood. She’s extremely talented — I don’t want to take away from that — but I do want to point out that she’s also the blondest and prettiest of the bunch (in Western ideal terms, of course).
I don’t think we need to “clean up” entertainment. Sexual imagery and pop music have always gone together: think Prince, Madonna, or heck, Elvis. If I go see Usher perform, I want to watch him dance, hear him sing and I’d be lying if I said I didn’t want to see him rip off his shirt and show off that six pack. Sexy’s fine with me (and I’d bet most people) as long as there’s talent to back it up — or at least a good hook and a danceable beat.
Comments
I like your push-back Judy. First, yes, I was thinking of Britney in her Baby-one-more-time phase, as a teenager. And I agree that entertainment shouldn’t be de-sexed — Britney is an amazing performer and dancer (Jordin Sparks is not a dancer). But — still. Not to be Tipper-Gore like, but I just don’t like the extremely sexed-out teens in entertainment. I can watch American Idol with my three young boys, but I would probably switch the channel if Baby One More time came on. I think the most interesting question is whether the entertainment industry is participatory or not. I agree that we all certainly vote with our dollars — but still, I mean, Paris Hilton? I’d certainly like to vote her off the planet of stardom. I DO think American Idol is a good example of pro-am collaboration — the experts get us to a certain point (picking out the top 24) and then continue to offer expert advice along the way. And then we all vote. (or sit at home and critique the singers, like i do.) I love your reference to Maroulis — LOL. But how about Michael Johns — he rocks!
Well, take heart in the fact that Paris’ album tanked as did her most recent movie, “The Hottie And The Nottie!”
I agree that pro-am works well on “Idol” and even better on “Dancing With The Stars” because the judges voting and the audience voting is combined. On “Dancing” it’s great to get comments that explain the art (and sport) of ballroom dancing, and although everybdy hates Simon, he’s usually right.
[...] I look forward to watching tonight with my neighbor and husband while folding laundry. I’ve written elsewhere about how American Idol is not only a successful example of the type of “pro-am [...]