Idol's Flaws Stifle Improvement

            This season’s “Cumberland Idol” – a singing competition hosted annually on the campus of the University of the Cumberlands – is nearing its finale, and it has so far been filled with entertaining performances, powerful voices, and shocking eliminations. As “Cumberland Idol” has grown from its early stages from where it began over five years ago, it has improved in audience turnout, production quality, and overall singing talent. And this season is no different; the cast of contestants competing the last few months has featured more pure singing ability than any before it – at least three of them have been blessed with high quality, recording-potential type voices. However, if history has any intention of repeating itself again – and it has already shown its desire to do so – then one of these outrageously talented competitors will not win.

            This has been seen time and time again throughout the five seasons of Cumberland Idol. Last season? The most talented singer finished third. The season before? Third again. And before that? The best singer did not even reach the top three. Throughout the years, this particular talent show has revealed to viewers its worst and most shameful habit; it and its voting population (mostly, the folks responsible for the majority of votes) have shown a distinct inability to admit that the good singers are good.

                        Idol’s flaws are few, but inherently obvious. Most, however, could be overlooked, with the exception of one: the voting system currently in place is laughable at best, and downright vomit-inducing at worst. Even despite its flaws, Idol and its producers continually work and succeed at filling the Gatliff Chapel full of people eager and willing to cheer on some fantastic vocalists, only to send them back out feeling sour after eliminating yet another one of the crowd-favorite contestants. Changing the voting system will effectively change the competition, and it will be better rewarding and more satisfying for both the audience and those who participate. Here’s how:

            Simply put, you’ve got to do away with is the unlimited online voting. This allows people – most of whom have never seen a Cumberland Idol performance – to vote endlessly throughout the week from the home in Northern Kentucky, or across the border in Tennessee, or anywhere else. Cumberland Idol has reported vote tallies of over 50,000 on numerous occasions; not bad for a school with a student body of less than 3,000 total, including graduate students. Instead, offer ONE VOTE per online user. ONE VOTE. This can be done easily using Facebook’s “like” feature; just create a fan page and post pictures of each contestant. In addition to the ONE VOTE per online user, Idol vote counters should also reward those who actually attend the program by extending them the capability of voting twice; once in the online polls, which allows anyone to vote, and once by paper as they are leaving the auditorium. This way, the voting becomes more balanced, more based on performance, and it still remains secretive.

            These are relatively simple changes; nothing offered here would cause any kind of hiccup in production for those who so graciously work to create this program. And that isn’t what I want. All I want – and this is simple – is for the very best singers in the competition to ACTUALLY WIN the competition based on singing ability. And I don’t believe that’s too much to ask.