×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

When Vote Counting Goes Bad

timothy posted about a year ago | from the it-increments-the-database-or-else-it-gets-the-hose dept.

Television 128

ZipK writes "Television singing competition The Voice disclosed on Wednesday 'inconsistencies' with the tallying of on-line and SMS-based voting. Although host Carson Daly claimed the show wanted to be 'completely upfront,' the explanation from their third-party vote counter, Telescope, was anything but transparent. In particular, Telescope claims that disregarding all on-line and SMS-based voting for the two nights in question left no impact on the final results, but they haven't provided any detail of the 'inconsistency' or their ability to predict a complete lack of impact. Sure, it's only The Voice; but tomorrow it could be American Idol, and by next month, America's Got Talent."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

128 comments

News for nerds (5, Funny)

Ironchew (1069966) | about a year ago | (#43677099)

Sure, it's only The Voice; but tomorrow it could be American Idol, and by next month, America's Got Talent."

And nothing of value was lost?

Re:News for nerds (3, Informative)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | about a year ago | (#43677143)

Thank you. I came to post exactly this.
Without the question mark.

Re:News for nerds (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677187)

I literally yawned when I read this story. Then sneezed. Not feeling so great this morning :(

Re:News for nerds (4, Informative)

gstoddart (321705) | about a year ago | (#43677295)

Well, admittedly, I don't care about the reality shows.

But since there are laws about how you have to handle contests and the like, they need to really be able to prove that ignoring those votes had no effect on the outcome, or they could open themselves up for lawsuits.

Basically they'd have to show that the votes they ignored occurred in exactly the same distributions as the other voting methods.

And, since there's potentially a cost with voting, I have no idea if that even further mires things in.

I think they really do need to be able to explain this, and demonstrate that it didn't affect any outcomes. And if you've got several million people watching and voting, if they suddenly find out their voting is being ignored, will they keep watching?

Re:News for nerds (3, Informative)

vux984 (928602) | about a year ago | (#43678467)

Well, admittedly, I don't care about the reality shows.

"admittedly" you don't care? I'd not just admit it, I'd proudly proclaim that they are worthless trash and a complete waste of time that just leaves you dumber for watching them. :)

But since there are laws about how you have to handle contests and the like...

If they were legitimate contests they might actually be more watchable. But if you read the fine print...

Half the time there's stuff that often amounts to the equivalent of "The producers reserve the right to override viewer votes whenever they want, because they're more interested in finding conflict and drama than talent."

Reality shows are a farce.

Half the time there's stuff about scenes being "re-enacted" based on something actually happened.

Participant release forms often include terms to consent to having personal, embarrassing, information disclosed. That information may be factual or fictionalized. ... ie; if the producers want to give you an embarrassing and untrue "backstory" about you, they can and will.

There was a recent incident where an Obama speech pre-empted a few reality shows so there was a disclaimer that "although the show was not broadcast in its entirety in some markets, it has not affected the result."

Yeah. That's credible. A whole state missed 20 minutes of the show; but that didn't affect anything.

I presume that's because voters don't really matter anyway and we just pull numbers out of our ass anyway.

Re:News for nerds (1)

kwark (512736) | about a year ago | (#43678773)

"I'd not just admit it, I'd proudly proclaim that they are worthless trash and a complete waste of time that just leaves you dumber for watching them"

[snip]

For someone that is makeing the above claim, you sure do have an in-depth knowledge about these programs you might only get buy actually watching/following them.

Re:News for nerds (1)

vux984 (928602) | about a year ago | (#43679491)

For someone that is makeing the above claim, you sure do have an in-depth knowledge about these programs you might only get buy actually watching/following them.

I think the irony here is that seems that most people who watch and follow the programs don't know most of that stuff.

Re:News for nerds (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43679643)

Methinks you're certainly protesting a lot.

Re:News for nerds (1)

Obfuscant (592200) | about a year ago | (#43678561)

But since there are laws about how you have to handle contests and the like, they need to really be able to prove that ignoring those votes had no effect on the outcome, or they could open themselves up for lawsuits.

TFA talks about "predicting" the impact of ignoring those votes. It doesn't take prediction or very much proof. It's simple.

"If we counted the discarded ballots and included them in the scores, Team B won, Team C was second and Team A was third. If we discard those ballots, Team B won, Team C was second and Team A was third." That's what the statement 'the results were not changed by discarding the ballots" means.

What a tempest in a teapot.

Re:News for nerds (1)

void* (20133) | about a year ago | (#43678655)

If that is actually the case - why bother removing them at all?

Re:News for nerds (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43679235)

Presumably they forgot to count them the first time (when they announced the result) then when someone called them on it they either: counted the votes and found no change in the final result, or calculated how many votes would be needed to affect the outcome and determined that number was larger than the total number of new votes (making it impossible for the new votes to affect the outcome). Note that the second case is why absentee ballots only rarely get counted in US presidential elections (the race a forgone conclusion before they get to counting them).

The alternative is the votes don't matter, and the outcome was pre-determined.

Re:News for nerds (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#43678819)

I think they really do need to be able to explain this, and demonstrate that it didn't affect any outcomes. And if you've got several million people watching and voting, if they suddenly find out their voting is being ignored, will they keep watching?

This is why I thought that maybe this *is* news for nerds...it points out a means of disrupting reality TV culture.

Re:News for nerds (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43679717)

And if you've got several million people watching and voting, if they suddenly find out their voting is being ignored, will they keep watching?

The real question the networks are probably asking is: will they keep voting?

HEADLINE: "Questionable Result from Questionable.. (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about a year ago | (#43677573)

...Implementation of Questionable Methodology for Questionable Entertainment."

Re:HEADLINE: "Questionable Result from Questionabl (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677655)

Questionable methodology? You fit the bill liar http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3722427&cid=43654735 [slashdot.org] and provide us huge entertainment in your evading answering a simple question.

Re:HEADLINE: "Questionable Result from Questionabl (-1, Flamebait)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about a year ago | (#43678099)

Yo mamma's diarrhea coats your nosehairs.

"Run, Forrest: RUN!!!"... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43678303)

From a SIMPLE question (you don't DARE answer) -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3733655&op=Reply&threshold=1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=43677655 [slashdot.org]

* Along with disproving the 3 links shown here too (since you have an issue with custom hosts files) -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3725365&cid=43659719 [slashdot.org] well, "Mr. Microsoft" (yea, right - maybe as a janitor) YOU FAIL!)

Yes - it has been MY PLEASURE, and you certainly had it coming for months to YEARS of this crap outta you -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3581857&cid=43276741 [slashdot.org] done by the 100's here by ac posts (but you messed up in THAT particular link and posted using your registered 'lusername' instead there giving away it was you, all along!).

Run forrest, & keep using your unjustifiable downmods to *try* to effetely HIDE you failed, badly on technicals and yes, that you are a no good troll & liar.

APK

P.S.=> If YOU are indicative of what worked @ MS? WoW... you suck - no wonder you are "no longer present" there... one of my "technical/intellectual" heroes, in Mr. Anders Heijelsberg (sp?) is there, he created Delphi/Turbo Pascal & architected .NET... he I can believe is there, you though? Please, lol, I burnt you on BASIC networking & computer science fundamentals in that 2nd link... easily!

... apk

Re:News for nerds (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677695)

Sure, it's only The Voice; but tomorrow it could be American Idol, and by next month, the Slashdot Poll."

There, fixed that for you.

Re:News for nerds (2)

Zephyn (415698) | about a year ago | (#43678243)

And that, boys and girls, is how CowboyNeal wound up with a recording contract. The end.

Some People... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677989)

...want to conduct local and national elections this way.

Re:News for nerds (1)

KeithJM (1024071) | about a year ago | (#43678261)

Sure, it's only The Voice; but tomorrow it could be American Idol, and by next month, America's Got Talent."

And nothing of value was lost?

That's the joke.

Re:News for nerds (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43680741)

Hence, the question mark. Man, some people can't take jokes about jokes....

Re:News for nerds (1)

ppz003 (797487) | about a year ago | (#43679421)

The interesting bit here is what votes were counted. If they nixed all SMS or online votes, then that leaves call-in votes and iTunes purchases.

Maybe the real conspiracy here is trying to force people to buy more from iTunes if they want their precious votes to count.

Re:News for nerds (1)

pipedwho (1174327) | about a year ago | (#43679835)

Since you can't buy the same track more than once on iTunes, it is a much better indicator of popularity than SMS or online votes where votes can be made hundreds of times over (by friends, family or other coordinated efforts).

And if you really like the performance, why waste money SMSing a vote or two, when you can download the track you like and have it in your collection for about the same amount of money?

Re:News for nerds (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about a year ago | (#43679543)

People have discussed using such means for democracy, so investigating it is relevant. Even if the immediate cause is lame.

Re:News for nerds (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43680089)

Sure, it's only The Voice; but tomorrow it could be American Idol, and by next month, America's Got Talent."

And by next year it could be political elections. Here in Finland, it seems that everybody is pushing for internet based elections. The comparison seems to be that if we can do banking online, we can also do elections. What they fail to realize is that the banks are taking a well-calculated business risk offering their services online. Also, we had one trial with election machines - but that (luckily) failed due to users not understanding the UI and the election had to be re-done.

Anyway, this problem with SMS polls has been well-known in the industry for at least the past 10 years. Only a part of the votes are actually counted, but if the dropped votes are random, then it shouldn't significantly affect the outcome - as long as it's for a TV show, who cares.

also with a online vote work can force you to vote (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about a year ago | (#43680405)

also with a online vote work can force you to vote way with boss on your back.

The Voice? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677111)

What is that, a TV show? Cut the cable several years ago and my brain cells than me every single day!

Re:The Voice? (2)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year ago | (#43677243)

Looks like the damage to your lingual center was already done.

Re:The Voice? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677415)

Or the broadcast waves he was unable to physically sever did the damage

nt (4, Insightful)

shentino (1139071) | about a year ago | (#43677121)

The sad news is that people are probably going to rage more about this than they would for REAL politics that choose who gets into office.

Re:nt (4, Insightful)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year ago | (#43677297)

Network television is one of the best means of social control invented so far, second only to religion. Think about how many people really care about who wins American Idol, and think about how many people really care about who is elected to their local government. Who the American Idol winner is has no real effect on my life, whereas my local city council does when they decide whether to put money into repairing nearby streets or changing the zoning to accommodate a CVS in my neighborhood.

Re:nt (1)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year ago | (#43677359)

Who the American Idol winner is has no real effect on my life, whereas my local city council does when they decide whether to put money into repairing nearby streets or changing the zoning to accommodate a CVS in my neighborhood.

The council has more effect, sure, but does your vote make any difference?

(apart from putting a different name on the council officer's doors)

Re:nt (2)

operagost (62405) | about a year ago | (#43677885)

Sometimes it does, actually. I'll tell you what doesn't: voting for the school board. Not a single candidate ever runs on the platform of not raising property taxes. As expected, this means your property taxes go up every year, even though you aren't earning more and your property is worth about the same. It's sad when someone loses their house not because they couldn't pay the mortgage, but because they COULDN'T PAY THE PROPERTY TAX.

Re:nt (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43678717)

Have you been barred from running on said platform?

Re:nt (2)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year ago | (#43678829)

I'll tell you what doesn't: voting for the school board.

Tell that to the citizens of Dover, PA and the several other places that have pushed intelligent design into public school classrooms.

As a sibling pointed out, if you really are upset, why not run yourself? Or why not recruit a friend or neighbor to run, and help with his campaign? In many places, you can get elected to local government (in what is frequently a non-partisan election) by doing a door-to-door canvas all by your lonesome, because a few hundred votes may be all it takes.

Re:nt (4, Insightful)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about a year ago | (#43677459)

That's because people actually feel like they have a real CHOICE when voting on American Idol.

Re:nt (1)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | about a year ago | (#43677739)

i wonder what it would be like if we treated elections like american idol? each week the politicians get up in font of a crowd and give a speach on the pre-chossen topic and the one with the lowest score is kicked out of the running. we could get rid of caucuses and primaries the more contestants a party has the more chances to win. it would probably be better then what we have now.

or we could treat it like march madness and have a debate off and eliminate the weak and the stupid in the first few rounds.

Re:nt (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677831)

eliminate the weak and the stupid in the first few rounds.

So.....if we first eliminate the weak and stupid, who'd be left to vote for in week 2?

Re:nt (1)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | about a year ago | (#43678113)

eliminate the weak and the stupid in the first few rounds.

So.....if we first eliminate the weak and stupid, who'd be left to vote for in week 2?

people that currently go unelected.

Re:nt (1)

markhb (11721) | about a year ago | (#43678507)

You're both assuming that the weak and stupid would actually be eliminated. Given that we're discussing a popular vote with no way to enforce even the slightest of eligibility rules (i.e., minimum age), I think that the best description of the ultimate victors would be "the hot ones," regardless of intellectual heft.

Re:nt (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43678893)

What would be better is if elections were more like Survivor. Anybody who wants to run gets placed on an island and the rest of us go on with our lives.

Re:nt (2)

PoolOfThought (1492445) | about a year ago | (#43679433)

Sadly, this is already what we do! The people vote in real elections just like they do on these TV shows. Who looks like me? Check. Who makes me FEEL like they're on MY side? Check. Who says they'll protect me from the boogie man? Check. Who would I want to have beer with? Check. Who wants to be my Santa Clause? Check.

You'd end up with the same people in charge because those people ARE smart - politically or "socially". They ARE calculating. Many of them are eloquent and if given time to actually prepare a speech on each topic would be even more so. I don't think your method changes anything... which is quite sad to actually think about.

Re:nt (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43680431)

A real choice? This from people who complains that both the parties are about the same? Well, it is the same with "Idol". They are all lousy singers. Not much difference. Meet the new winner, same as the old winner . . .

Re:nt (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#43677487)

Network television is one of the best means of social control invented so far, second only to religion. Think about how many people really care about who wins American Idol, and think about how many people really care about who is elected to their local government. Who the American Idol winner is has no real effect on my life, whereas my local city council does when they decide whether to put money into repairing nearby streets or changing the zoning to accommodate a CVS in my neighborhood.

yeah mass media is a social control mechanism! just ask the people who were in power in 1890's and could send anyone to die anywhere without much backlash as no bloody pictures came home.

ok, the point is that mass media actually divides power to more people rather than the other way around.

Re:nt (0)

stderr_dk (902007) | about a year ago | (#43677527)

Who the American Idol winner is has no real effect on my life, whereas my local city council does when they decide whether to put money into repairing nearby streets or changing the zoning to accommodate a CVS in my neighborhood.

Your local council decides that? Weird...

When I wanted to have a version control system, I just installed one. I didn't have to get permission from anyone.

Re:nt (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677991)

or changing the zoning to accommodate a CVS in my neighborhood.

Please, SVN or Git.

I've never understood the signs that say "CVS/pharmacy". I'm used to /trunk, /tags, and /branches, but what is /pharmacy used for?

They reversed the charges though, right? (4, Insightful)

FatLittleMonkey (1341387) | about a year ago | (#43677125)

I can only assume they did the right thing and cancelled the charges for all the votes that weren't counted? They surely wouldn't profiteer at the expense of true fans.

Obama precincts (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677127)

Yeah, Obama got 99% of the vote in Pennsylvania. Right.
 
Ron Paul 2012! Oh wait, we don't count those votes...

Mod parent up! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677239)

Happened in Florida and Ohio too. [marketdailynews.com]
 
That tool Karl Rove was almost in tears on Faux news when Obongo won. It was almost worth the fraud just for this.

Re:Mod parent up! (2)

AK Marc (707885) | about a year ago | (#43679893)

Karl was just mad because he was beat at his own game. He rigged the election in Florida 8 years prior. We haven't had a "valid" election since Clinton (which had shenanigans, but the popular vote was lopsided enough that it didn't matter).

Was TRL faked too? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677163)

Now all those Total Request Live rankings are going to be called into question too! Carson Daily, I didn't know you were still alive!

Couldn't care less... (1)

frootcakeuk (638517) | about a year ago | (#43677175)

about the Voice, Willy-I-Am, Cowell or any of the Amerca's or Britain's got talent(less wankers everywhere). They're not using it to vote, so I really couldn't give a shit, and i highly doubt anyone here actually does. Next!

Re:Couldn't care less... (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about a year ago | (#43679937)

When everyone's used to overt vote-rigging, they'll come out of the closet on the election vote rigging.

Elections (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677197)

Sure, it's only The Voice; but tomorrow it could be American Idol, and by next month, America's Got Talent.

And the month after that, the presidential elections.

Re:Elections (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677581)

Sweeps week!

Still more transparancy... (3, Funny)

Dartz-IRL (1640117) | about a year ago | (#43677203)

That's still more transparancy and objectivity that most US elections that use electronic voting machines.

Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. (3, Funny)

wcrowe (94389) | about a year ago | (#43677237)

You mean people actually think the voting is honest and real? That the TV execs don't advance the contestants that they think will be better for ratings?

Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. (2)

gstoddart (321705) | about a year ago | (#43677417)

You mean people actually think the voting is honest and real? That the TV execs don't advance the contestants that they think will be better for ratings?

Actually, given the number of scandals which have happened over the years from people fixing game shows and the like, and the laws which followed ... if the TV execs were really fiddling with the outcomes, there would be legal fall-out as it's considered to be a contest.

So, by law, that voting on the outcome legally better be honest and real. And if people believed the shows had no integrity in the voting, the shows would tank pretty quickly.

Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. (3, Interesting)

wcrowe (94389) | about a year ago | (#43677579)

I see, so you're sure it's a contest? And not just a show that appears to be a contest?

Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. (1)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about a year ago | (#43677597)

In a game show scenario there is an objective measurement that comes into play. For example, the answer is what it is, and it can be proved. A "talent" contest is subjective, so there is no way to hold it to the same standard.

Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. (3, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | about a year ago | (#43677643)

You don't have to say anything about the tastes of the voters (which from what I've seen is questionable).

It's not about better, it's about favorite.

And that still needs to be held to an objective standard by law. It's a contest, there are winners, and people vote on it -- that part is still covered by laws.

Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. (2)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about a year ago | (#43677797)

The contract is between the contestants and the producers not the producers and the viewers. Have you read it, or have you just decided you already know what it must say? They may say in their advertisements that "Your vote helps decide decide", but does it say anything about them being weighed equally with the network executives votes?

Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. (2)

gstoddart (321705) | about a year ago | (#43677937)

No, I'm basing it entirely on knowledge of things like this [wikipedia.org] where the $64,000 question and other shows were rigged.

I'm simply pointing out that, since there are laws surrounding how this is supposed to work, I therefore assume they're in compliance with those laws. If discounting those votes truly didn't affect the outcome, then it's fine.

I really don't care about the outcome, I'm just saying they might need to demonstrate their claim it didn't affect anything -- not to me (because I don't care), but possibly to the FCC or something. What they can't do it just make up their own results.

Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. (1)

keytoe (91531) | about a year ago | (#43679637)

No, I'm basing it entirely on knowledge of things like this where the $64,000 question and other shows were rigged.

These reality shows aren't contests at all. They're very carefully orchestrated bits of entertainment designed to engage the audience and make them feel involved. Look at American Idol: the 'contestants' don't win anything - unless the producers decide to give them a recording contract at the end. Sometimes that's the winner, sometimes it's one of the losers, sometimes it's multiple people and sometimes it's nobody.

The long and the short of it is that the contestants sign onto a contract that will pretty much say 'the producers will pay you for being on the show, and will own any potential performing career you may have, but aren't required to ever do anything with those rights'. It's a talent hunt by the producers, but instead of having to do it themselves on their own dime, they televise it and MAKE money.

The whole voting thing is schtick for the audience. Oh, I'm sure the producers look at the vote counts to make sure popular performers come back, but they're only one factor in the decision. In that context, it's pretty clear that Telescope claiming that the missing votes "left no impact" on the outcome is accurate.

This! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677529)

I didn't believe these votes counted for crap back in the 80's and with reality TV having only become worse in the new century, I never expected them to count now either.

These shows make their money on drama. If they really voted off the persons who deserved it the show would have no controversy, and thus ratings would drop, voting would drop, and all paths of revenue would drop. If you think it through, you realize voting was always a waste of money cause it was always the producer's call as to who gets axed or stays.

Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677617)

They don't have to interfere with the voting - they already control all the information you're using to decide who to vote for. How they choose to edit together the background music, audience & judges reactions, personal stories leading up to the performances, etc. is sufficient to lead people to vote the way the execs want.

Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43679365)

In the UK the makers of Big Brother had 1 million phone calls booked so that they could ensure they got the result that they wanted such as getting Nasty Nick kicked off if the viewers were not annoyed by his cheating by bringing forbidden writing material which the producers did not see despite broadcasting him using them.

Luckily for the viewers the production team showed the previously unnoticed broadcasted cheating and the house mates expelled him.

This is a good thing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677255)

"Sure, it's only The Voice; but tomorrow it could be American Idol, and by next month, America's Got Talent."

Be sure to remind me how terrifying this is as I reach for the world's tiniest violin.

You're kidding right? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677351)

Oh noes, it could be American Idol. Who gives a flipping fuck what the sheeple will get miscounted on their precious America TV for the lazy ass? What about something that actually matters like an election?

Re:You're kidding right? (1)

molesdad (1003858) | about a year ago | (#43677551)

Oh dear you really think that how you vote matters in an election :-(

Re:You're kidding right? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43681071)

No, you made that up. It's still more important than American Idol though.

WTF? (1)

Nethemas the Great (909900) | about a year ago | (#43677517)

Did I miss something? "The Voice," "American Idol," "America's Got Talent?" No statistics, no hardware, not even politics tangential to technology; nothing but a link to a couple paragraphs on a site for addle brained people whose concerns reach no further than the next amusement to distract them from realizing their own mediocrity.

What the hell Timothy? Have you lost your passion? Did you sell out? Fall on your head? ...

American Idol No DIff (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677595)

Having worked with a company that was contracted to handle voting for American Idol, I can tell you part of the negotiations revealed that there were several instances where family paid large sums to predictive dialing companies to ensure their children moved to the next round. Now this was more than 4 years ago.

Note for the record, I do not watch or have watched American Idel.

The Dumbening (1)

freeze128 (544774) | about a year ago | (#43677623)

So there is this company that is being paid to count votes, and they cant explain the inconsistencies they are getting? Really? They're only job is to *COUNT*. It's the first thing that is taught in schools to 4 year olds, many of which who have already mastered it.

Don't pay a counting company that can't count. Fire those idots! Or better yet, put them up on "Are you smarter than a 5th grader?".

read the fine print (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43677675)

A few highlights from the show's fine print:

TLDR: no matter what happens, they can/will alter the votes as they see fit.

http://g1.votenow.tv/tpl/TermsView.php [votenow.tv]

VOTE TERMS & CONDITIONS
Viewers must note that all of the following rules and procedures are subject to change at the sole discretion of NBCUniversal Media, LLC and Finnmax LLC ("Producer").

Following the broadcast of the finale performance episode, the artist receiving the highest number of total audience votes will be declared the winner of "The Voice".

If for any reason the voting is not capable of being executed as planned, or if there is an infection by computer virus, bugs, tampering, unauthorized intervention, fraud or technical or reporting failures, or if any other causes beyond the control of Administrators corrupt or affect the administration, security, fairness, integrity, or proper conduct of this voting, the Administrators reserve the right, in their sole discretion, to withdraw the transmission of any vote, but are in no way obligated to do so. Furthermore, the Administrators may, but are not obligated to, permanently disqualify from any promotion any person they believe has intentionally violated these rules, and terminate or suspend voting at any point and declare the vote results based on the votes up to that point, if it appears that the voting process has been so distorted by hacking, failures, errors or other interference that the results would not reflect actual valid votes should the voting continue.

Administrators reserve the right, but are not obligated, to disqualify, block or remove any votes from any individual who votes by any electronic, mechanical or automated means, or otherwise tampers with the vote process, or for any other reason, as determined by Administrators in their sole discretion.

Administrators reserve the right to modify the show's contest rules, and the terms and conditions of this voting process at any time in their sole discretion.

Where are the Storage Wars posts? (4, Insightful)

dstyle5 (702493) | about a year ago | (#43677691)

Slashdot mods, come on, where are they. I could also use some Jersey Shore, Teen Mom or Fix This Kitchen related posts.

I only wish DICE would've bought /. sooner to give us great content like this.

here's my logic (2)

slashmydots (2189826) | about a year ago | (#43677819)

I still think it's all fake. The 3rd party vote company wants money. The show wants money. Whatever result would make the show get more money is the one they're both going to make happen, one way or another. It's not like there's some public notary from the government verifying every vote. Third party companies spring up out of nowhere and usually service primarily one giant company for the majority of their income.

No rocket-science FFS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43678447)

WTF is difficult with doing 1+1+1+1+.....
How stupid do you have to be to introduce inconsistencies while adding integers???? It's not rocket-science.

It probably didn't matter. Here's why: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43678525)

The way The Voice is set up is that you have two sets of votes: The Judges and the Audience. In the final round, the only votes that count are the Audience's - the judges do not get a say. But in earlier rounds, the Audience's votes count for less and the judges' count for more. In the earliest round in which the Audience can vote, their vote actually counts for very little as compared to the judges - something like 10% of the total, as I recall.

So they're right, removing that 10% of the vote from this week's result (in an early round of the competition) probably did not change anything, as that 10% would not be able to override the judges' 90%. But that could have been made more clear.

Re:It probably didn't matter. Here's why: (1)

techno-vampire (666512) | about a year ago | (#43680079)

It didn't take me more than a few seconds to come up with a case where it could matter: in the judge's vote, first and second place differ by only a few points, and most of the home voters voted for whoever was in second place. It's unlikely, of course, but if enough of the viewers vote the same way, they could change the outcome even in the first round they're allowed to vote. And, of course, if the judge's pick is in the lead by enough, it won't matter how the home viewers vote, even if they all vote the same way.

Do the voters get their money back? (1)

adameros (851468) | about a year ago | (#43679921)

Many of the people voted by calling a phone number that bills them. In my mind these people paid for a vote. If the vote was lost, they never got what they paid for. Will The Voice be reimbursing people if their vote was lost or otherwise not used?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...