The Impact of TV Talent Shows

Djarts Voice Coaching ~ www.djarts.com.au

© Dr Daniel K. Robinson - 2013 Page 1 of 6

TheImpactofTVTalentShows By Dr Daniel K. Robinson (2013)

It’s hard to turn on the television today without being bombarded with

advertising for the latest version of a TV Talent Show. Whether it is IDOL, X-

Factor or The Voice, these shows have grown in popularity, both in Australia and

overseas, over the past 10-15 years. Sue Collins (2008) provides us with a

helpful depiction of what constitutes as ‘reality TV’ highlighting, “the production

of reality TV expands the labour stock to include nonunionized, nonpaid or low-

paid contestants playing themselves” . While the telecasting of talent shows, and

their ‘nonpaid or low-paid contestants’, is not new, the promise of subsequent

fame to competition winners is. For

example, competitors on the long

running (1983–1995) talent show

‘Star Search’ were offered the chance to

win prize money. Comparatively,

today’s TV Talent Shows offer recording

contracts and a chance at celebrity.

The ‘commodification of celebrity’ (Collins, 2008, p. 90) is a key component in

drawing willing participants into the public display of their ‘talent’. With the

advent of social media, such as Facebook and YouTube, the opportunity to

present oneself as ‘significant’, beyond the traditional confines of immediate

influence (family and friends) has ensured a ready market of people willing to

gamble their talent in front of national audiences. This newly formed

environment presents itself as a challenge to modern singing teachers who are

regularly confronted with students wishing to participate in TV Talent Shows.

How should today’s singing teacher respond to the student who insists on

auditioning for the TV Talent Show?

In a recent online survey1 respondents were asked whether they thought TV

Talent Shows further the career of participating singers. Eighty five percent

1 The survey, TV Talent Shows, was conducted using the online survey tool: Survey Monkey. Conducted 1–10 March, 2013; the survey harvested an international participant sample of n305.



(n247/292) of respondents acknowledged that ‘some’ of the participant’s careers

are benefited by their participation of such programs. One respondent (SP281)

commented,

The television exposure may assist those singers who already have professional

collateral in place (i.e. Albums/singles available via online

merchants/websites/physical distribution) to further raise their profile and

increase sales to a broader audience. This is presuming however that the stigma

of actually being involved in the show does not detract from the pre-existing

branding the singer has established in the first place (musically and image-wise).

This insightful response highlights the need for careful consideration when

participation is being contemplated. Anecdotally, I have observed that many

amateur singers do not apply this level of ‘pre-thought’ when deciding to attend

the various shows’ auditions. It seems singing teachers are not offering much

guidance either. Of those survey participants who had received singing lessons

from a ‘qualified/experienced singing teacher’ (n197/293), 76% of respondents

suggested that participation in TV Talent Shows was never discussed during

lesson time. With the prevalence of these programs, and their apparent focus on

singers, this statistic is a concerning observation and requires further attention.

Why are singing teachers not engaging their students in conversation about

these programs? Ethically, while not directly accountable for the singer’s well-

being outside of their own teaching studios, teachers have a responsibility to

direct and school the development of the student; both as singer and as artist.

What psychological impact does the rollercoaster-like journey of these programs

have on successful auditionees; not to mention the winners who experience the

elation of winning, and the often short lived celebrity status

(only to be absorbed back into society as if nothing

happened). One contestant (Fiona Mariah) in a recent

Australian season of Australia’s Got Talent, reported that

she had suffered “a period of depression” (Day, 2012) after

her elimination from the show. Non-successful participants

are not the only ones subjected to the mental severities of

these programs. The now famous Susan Boyle, after

coming second in the 2009 version of Britain’s Got Talent,

Susan Boyle Runner-up:

2009 Britains Got Talent



“was immediately shuttled into the uber-celebrity activity of rehab upon its [the

programs’] conclusion” (Locke, 2009, p. 3). Ultimately, singing students are

responsible for their own decisions, but surely the singing teacher fraternity

should discuss the pros and cons associated with participation more openly with

their students.

Pedagogical Considerations

There are a number of pedagogical concerns that can be discussed between

teacher and student. Firstly, teachers should encourage their students to

consider the short and long term ramifications of their participation in TV Talent

Shows. The short term considerations include the psychological impact of

immediate rejection during auditions. It is important that singers attend the

auditions with an understanding of the ‘audition process’; and a

contextualisation of who might be auditioning them. Typically, due to the high

numbers of auditionee hopefuls (generally in their tens of thousands), TV Talent

Shows conduct ‘cattle call’ auditions. The cattle call is often a quick (30 seconds

per auditionee) process designed to move the talent through at a high rate2. One

survey respondent (SP213) commented on their experience at an audition

stating, “From my experience auditioning with The Voice, the process is

gruelling, unfair & motivated by how much money the record company and TV

networks can make”. This person’s comment highlights the impersonal nature of

the cattle call process. Perhaps this sense of despondency could have been

mitigated by open and frank discussion between teacher and student. SP213 had

received singing lessons but their audition for The Voice was never discussed

during lessons. It may have also helped this individual to know that, in the case

of The Voice, many of the allocated spots for the program contestants have

already been allotted to singers directly contacted by the program producers.3

This ‘weighting’ of the audition process further lessens the opportunity of the

naive participant who believes the auditions are based purely on merit.

Anecdotally, I have noted a heighted sense of self-doubt in student singers after

they have been through the cattle call process of these TV Talent Shows. Due to 2 These programs often employ a three phase audition process. First phase: Cattle Call; Second Phase: Present to Program Producer; Third Phase: Present to celebrity judges panel. 3 I had a student who was contacted directly by the program producers. This unsolicited approach came with a special code which was to be written on their audition form; ensuring unrestricted passage to the higher levels of the audition process.



the mass-media presentation of these programs and the repetitive nature of

their advertisement (not to mention the program proper) it seems that many

singers, albeit subconsciously, lift the programs to a status of power; a power

that has somehow earned the right to determine whether a person’s vocal talent

has the right to be heard. This process driven, stratification of voice, can leave

the unprepared singer either elated or dismayed; neither of which are properly

founded given the swift manner in which the voice has been assessed. For those

who have been dismissed from the process, the lack of feedback can leave the

singer void of the necessary affirmation required to continue their journey of

development. At times the encouragement from friends, family and trusted

singing teacher are not enough to gainsay the all-powerful TV Talent Show that

commences its advertising with slogans such as, “We are have found the best 20

voices in [place your countries name here]”. Obviously, if you’re at home in your

living room watching the ad you are not counted among the top 20; so where do

you rank? Given that ranking is being subtly presented by the programs as that

which must be attained too, the non-ranking of unsuccessful auditionees

inadvertently suggests a status void of worth.

The consideration of long term ramifications is also necessary. While participants

are eager to win, many may not dare to believe they actually will. This can cause

the auditionee to not fully consider the long term impact of their involvement.

For example, successful auditionees are required to dedicate approximately

three months of their lives to the programs’ season. For some participants this

will require the leaving of jobs; employment that may not be available when

they return from the journey. For some older singers part of the appeal might be

the escape from the ‘everyday’; but have these singers considered the

consequences that might be wrought on family and friends? The personal cost of

celebrity is high; and often the charge is paid by those closest to the person

enjoying the fame (as well as the celebrity themselves).

Finally, there is an impact on the perception of what is required to hone the craft

of singing. The short 3month ‘zero to hero’ process of the TV Talent Shows gives

the impression that anyone can be plucked from obscurity and placed on a

national/international stage; celebrated for their new found vocal prowess.

Juliette Hughes (2005), while commenting on the impact of Australian Idol on



young voices writes, “It all seems to have been a resistless propulsion into the

culture of consuming rather than doing. Idol culture – all about the product, not

about an artist developing naturally”. Hughes’ comments bring us back to where

this article commenced: the commodification of celebrity.

When the auditions have been run, the competition has

been staged, a winner selected, and recording contract

awarded, what is left is a person transformed into a

commodity; a commodity with a shelf life whose length is

often determined by the technical resolve (or lack

thereof) of the contestants main tool: the voice. One

recent example of this is Australia’s 2012 season of The

Voice where the winner, Karise Eden, has had limited

exposure directly following the program’s completion.

Notwithstanding the fickle nature of show-biz, and understanding that Eden

could release an album under Universal Music the day after this article is

published, it seems plausible that one distinct mitigating factor restricting the

long-term success of Eden’s ongoing career is the obvious dysphonic nature of

her voice. What cannot be determined here is whether Eden’s voice was

functionally compromised prior to the commencement of the program’s season

or whether the severities of the vocal loads sustained during the program’s three

months of performance are to blame. What is certain is that Eden’s voice,

without professional care and instruction, will not travel the distance required for

an enduring vocal career4. The singing teacher is well advised to discuss the

challenges facing the voice when it is subjected to the inflexibilities of the

program proper; once the machine starts rolling it stops for no-one (not even

the contestants).

Of course, one cannot ignore the many success stories that these programs have

produced. Artists such as Kelly Clarkson (USA), Guy Sebastian (Australia), Leona

Lewis (UK) have all received their ‘start’ from TV Talent Shows. Whether these

successful participants might have developed into ‘vocal celebrities’, aside from

their respective programs assistance, will remain debateable. What is clear is the

TV Talent Show format (and new versions yet to be released), for the 4 It is important to note here that I am not commenting on Eden’s talent as a singer, stylistically or otherwise. Simply, any sports person with a physical injury will be unable to perform at their peak; so too it is with voice. A damaged voice cannot sustain sound to the best of its ability.



foreseeable future at least, is here to stay. It is important, therefore, that

teachers and students of voice carefully consider their engagement with and

participation in such programs. It is a case of ‘buyer beware’; or as the case may

be, ‘singer be smart’.

References

Collins, S. (2008). Making the most out of 15 minutes: Reality TV's dispensible celebrity. Television New Media, 9(2), 87–110.

Day, W. s. (2012, 12th November). AGT finalist: 'It's rigged'. Women's Day.

Hughes, J. (2005). Idol voices. The Age, from http://www.theage.com.au/news/music/idol-voices/2005/12/02/1133422077032.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap3

Locke, K. (2009). Paul's enthusiasm: Mass media, interactive technology and musical performance. Paper presented at the PESA, Hawaii.

WhoisDrDanielK.Robinson?Danielisafreelanceartistandeducator.In2011DanielcompletedhisDoctorofMusicalArtsdegreeattheQueenslandConservatoriumGrif ithUniversity.HehasservedasNationalVicePresident(2009–11)andNationalSecretaryfortheAustralianNationalAssociationofTeachersofSinging(2006–11)andwasawardedtheANATSNationalCerti icateofRecognitionforservicetotheprofessionin2012.DanielistheprincipalSingingVoiceSpecialistforDjarts(www.djarts.com.au)andpresentsworkshopsandseminarsto church singers across Australia and abroad. He and his wife Jodie have three children and live inBrisbane,QueenslandAustralia.

Documents

The Impact of TV Talent Shows