Slashdot Mirror


When Vote Counting Goes Bad

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."

128 comments

  1. News for nerds by Ironchew · · Score: 5, Funny

    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?

    1. Re:News for nerds by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 3, Informative

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

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    2. Re:News for nerds by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Informative

      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?

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:News for nerds by msauve · · Score: 1

      Well, they could go to written ballots, subject to public counting, like Survivor.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    4. Re:News for nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

    5. Re:News for nerds by Zephyn · · Score: 2

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

    6. Re:News for nerds by KeithJM · · Score: 1

      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.

    7. Re:News for nerds by Synerg1y · · Score: 1
    8. Re:News for nerds by vux984 · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

    9. Re:News for nerds by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      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.

    10. Re:News for nerds by void* · · Score: 1

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

      --


      Code or be coded.
    11. Re:News for nerds by maxwell+demon · · Score: 0

      Wake me up when vote counting goes bad at America's Next President.

      Oh wait, that already happened.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    12. Re:News for nerds by kwark · · Score: 1

      "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.

    13. Re:News for nerds by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    14. Re:News for nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

    15. Re:News for nerds by ppz003 · · Score: 1

      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.

    16. Re:News for nerds by vux984 · · Score: 1

      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.

    17. Re:News for nerds by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

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

    18. Re:News for nerds by cod3r_ · · Score: 1

      this is srs bidness dude.

    19. Re:News for nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Methinks you're certainly protesting a lot.

    20. Re:News for nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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?

    21. Re:News for nerds by pipedwho · · Score: 1

      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?

    22. Re:News for nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

    23. Re:News for nerds by fonitrus · · Score: 1

      probably they also did the vote count in Florida back when George Bush got elected :)

    24. Re:News for nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    25. Re:News for nerds by tehcyder · · Score: 0

      Reality shows are a farce.

      No, they're entertainment, just like The Simpsons, Family Guy, Firefly or whatever nerd-friendly TV show you can think of.

      I'm sure some people here only ever listen to Beethoven, read Shakespeare, watch Ingmar Bergman classics and use the internet for academic research, but the rest of us like some trash in our lives.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    26. Re:News for nerds by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

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

      Personally if I'd been sad enough to vote on this I'd be thinking class action, however, I have a life :)

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    27. Re:News for nerds by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      Yes, but AFTER those, it could be a Slashdot Poll.

    28. Re:News for nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But still, nothing of value was lost.

    29. Re:News for nerds by DedTV · · Score: 1

      Which don't apply to shows like this as the person calling in isn't eligible to win anything and the show doesn't charge people anything to take part.
      The only laws governing shows like this (that matter to viewers) are ones originally directed at game shows that prevent them from misrepresenting the vote results. Those same laws also require they take reasonable steps to ensure the voting is fair which, as someone mentioned, is why you see the fine print at the end of such shows that actually reads something similar to: "The producers, in consultation with an independent vote management company, reserve the right to remove votes identified as having been cast in such a significant block, either by technical enhancements or otherwise, that could unfairly influence the outcome of the voting." which just discloses they have to discard voting done by bots and such.

      When someone is eliminated or revealed as the winner it's a safe bet it's because it's what was in the vote tallies.
      Manipulating the votes is a bad way to get what they want as if that came out, there'd be no way to defend it and it'd cost them a hell of a lot more than having to put Taylor Hicks on a few posters. Plus, Telescope handles voting for lots of things beyond reality shows, some being legitimate contests. Allowing votes they collect to be manipulated or misrepresented would likely end up with them being sued into the ground if it was ever discovered.
      Why risk it when it's much easier to manipulate the viewers into voting the way they want them to? It's trivial to have the sound guys work less at making a certain contestant sound good, have the lighting or camera guys make them look bad, edit their little promo packages so they come off offensive or idiotic, tell a contestant the song they thought they were going to sing didn't clear at the last minute so they have to do something else without rehearsal, have the judges say someone who is good sucks over and over and over again or any of dozens of things that can sway viewers towards the results they want that would be very hard to prove was intentional.

      Also, depending on what the issue was, it may have affected American Idol as well since Telescope handles their voting as well.

      As to the merit of such shows, they aren't in the same class as The Real World or Honey Boo Boo. They're at least marginally about people with actual talents and skills beyond simply being trainwrecks of human existence. I like music so I watch them. But these days I only watch them on the DVR so I can skip all the sob stories and judges' egomaniacal ramblings so they're tolerable, which means I don't vote.

    30. Re:News for nerds by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      A "contest" is any game, puzzle, scheme, or plan which offers prospective participants the opportunity to receive or compete for gifts or prizes on the basis of skill or skill and chance, and which is conditioned wholly or partly on the payment of some value.

      That's this. Also, I think a lot of these are in place for two reasons:

      1. prevent solicitation
      2. prevent scam contents, as contests are an effective form of advertising promotion, so if a company offers 1 mil and never pays it, but sells more of its product as a result... well thats what these laws are here for.

      On a side note, my link reminded me of those old checks that I used to get in the mail that had a fake check saying i've already won... turns out those are illegal now, explains why I haven't seen one recently lol.

    31. Re:News for nerds by DedTV · · Score: 1

      "Contest" does not include a sporting event, performance, or tournament of skill, power or endurance between participants who are actually present.

      These shows meet the criteria for exemption as contests on several of those points.

      But you are completely correct as to the reason for why those rules exist. Many of them were drafted specifically to counter schemes enacted by the old "Publisher's Clearing House" to get people to buy magazines and the numerous scams that cloned PCH's methods.

    32. Re:News for nerds by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      The Voice is a singing competition, which interestingly enough can fall under

      prizes on the basis of skill

      from the first sentence, and then again under

      tournament of skill

      from the 2nd.

      Gotta love US law.

  2. nt by shentino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:nt by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    2. Re:nt by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      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)

      --
      No sig today...
    3. Re:nt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's because on TV shows, the votes actually change the outcome.

    4. Re:nt by TWiTfan · · Score: 4, Insightful

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

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    5. Re:nt by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    6. Re:nt by stderr_dk · · Score: 0

      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.

      --
      alias sudo="echo make it yourself #" ; # https://pipedot.org/~stderr & http://soylentnews.org/~stderr
    7. Re:nt by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    8. Re:nt by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      that and you don't have to listen to the winner for four years and you can only win once

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    9. Re:nt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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?

    10. Re:nt by operagost · · Score: 2

      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.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    11. Re:nt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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?

    12. Re:nt by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    13. Re:nt by markhb · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
    14. Re:nt by dkleinsc · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    15. Re:nt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

    16. Re:nt by PoolOfThought · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      My present is the activity I am currently engaged in with the purpose of turning the future into a better past.
    17. Re:nt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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 . . .

    18. Re:nt by shentino · · Score: 1

      Oh stick a fork in it.

    19. Re:nt by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      No one forces anybody to watch television. If you feel socially pressurized to watch a particular show, that is just a sign of the pathetic weakness of your character.

      In fact, a bit of harmless entertainment is good for you. Life is not, whatever some slashdotters seem to think, purely about working 18 hours a day at your job.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    20. Uh, yes, yes they do run on the platform of not raising property taxes. And they often win. Then, when confronted with the reality of the financial situation, they sometimes go back on their promises, confirming their ascension to the rank of politician.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    21. Re: nt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The guy who either won or finished second on "The Voice" (Someone had to tell me who he was) sat in and sang a song with the band at the club I run sound at. He was pretty good, hit all the notes and his voice has a nice tone. He absolutely can sing.
      However, he was clearly not the best singer on stage that night. He was absolutely blown away by the lead singer in the band and the bartender who sat in for aa song. He would not make any of my top ten lists, including top ten singers I've heard sing for free in the last month.
      But he can sing, and sing well.

        lists

  3. They reversed the charges though, right? by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    --
    Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    1. Re:They reversed the charges though, right? by cdrudge · · Score: 1

      There's no charge for voting AFAIK, so the only charges are between the voter and their service provider. The show would have no ability to reverse those changes if they even wanted too.

  4. Was TRL faked too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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!

  5. Couldn't care less... by frootcakeuk · · Score: 1

    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!

    --
    Remember kids: What's right isn't as important as what's profitable.
    1. Re:Couldn't care less... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

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

    2. Re:Couldn't care less... by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      It's a fucking disgrace that you're forced to watch the Voice, Britain/America's Got Talent, and the rest, and that your TV has no channel control or on/off switch.

      Honestly, it's just like 1984.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  6. Elections by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

    1. Re:Elections by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sweeps week!

  7. Still more transparancy... by Dartz-IRL · · Score: 3, Funny

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

    --
    So there I was, scribbling down some notes off the PC screen by hand, when I reached for the keyboard and Ctrl-S'd.
  8. Re:The Voice? by fisted · · Score: 1

    Doesn't look like it...

  9. And next month... by REALMAN · · Score: 1

    The U.S. Presidency!

    Nevermind. That already happened.

    --
    - A Frog in a pond utters an azure cry. -
  10. Re:The Voice? by stinkbomb · · Score: 2
  11. Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. by wcrowe · · Score: 3, Funny

    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?

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
    1. Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. by gstoddart · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. by wcrowe · · Score: 3, Interesting

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

      --
      Proverbs 21:19
    3. Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    4. Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

    5. Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    6. Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2

      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?

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    7. Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. by gstoddart · · Score: 2

      No, I'm basing it entirely on knowledge of things like this 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.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    8. Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

    9. Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. by keytoe · · Score: 1

      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.

    10. Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      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.

      Sounds pretty much like the Web 2.0 + model of the internet.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    11. Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      What do you think ratings are?

    12. Re:Reality shows are absolutely real and honest. by keytoe · · Score: 1

      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.

      Sounds pretty much like the Web 2.0 + model of the internet.

      Or politics.

  12. Mod parent up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    1. Re:Mod parent up! by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      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).

  13. Re:The Voice? by X0563511 · · Score: 2

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

    --
    For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  14. This is a good thing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "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.

    1. Re:This is a good thing. by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      What a strange euphemism.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    2. Re:This is a good thing. by O-Deka-K · · Score: 1

      I don't think you'd get very far on America's Got Talent with a tiny violin.

  15. You're kidding right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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?

    1. Re:You're kidding right? by molesdad · · Score: 1

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

      --
      If the shoe fits, it's ugly.
    2. Re:You're kidding right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    3. Re:You're kidding right? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      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?

      Have you ever voted in a slashdot poll? Have you ever laughed at a cat meme on the internet? Do you spend any time watching porn? Do you watch comedy shows on TV?

      How dare you waste your time when you should be designing cold fusion reactors or researching a cure for cancer or something else useful!

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  16. Re:The Voice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

  17. WTF? by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

    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? ...

    --
    Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    1. Re:WTF? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

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

      Been away long?

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    2. Re:WTF? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      a site for addle brained people whose concerns reach no further than the next amusement to distract them from realizing their own mediocrity.

      Jeez, if you hate slashdot that much, just stop visiting.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    3. Re:WTF? by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      We must resist the products of the second law of thermodynamics. If that requires slapping Timothy around every now and then then that's what must be done.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
  18. This! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

  19. HEADLINE: "Questionable Result from Questionable.. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

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

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  20. American Idol No DIff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    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.

  21. The Dumbening by freeze128 · · Score: 1

    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?".

  22. read the fine print by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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

    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.

  23. Where are the Storage Wars posts? by dstyle5 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  24. here's my logic by slashmydots · · Score: 2

    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.

  25. Some People... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

  26. No rocket-science FFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

  27. It probably didn't matter. Here's why: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

    1. Re:It probably didn't matter. Here's why: by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
  28. Oh well. by Fuzzums · · Score: 1

    Mandatory elections troll :)

    --
    Privacy is terrorism.
  29. Do the voters get their money back? by adameros · · Score: 1

    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?

  30. also with a online vote work can force you to vote by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

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

  31. got me by pat0514 · · Score: 1

    posting this would have made a better april fools joke than slashdots this year

  32. who where the idiots that moderated this? by ruir · · Score: 1

    I hope slashdot doesnt turn as badd as digg. Stopped reading time years ago. We came here to escape from this bullshit from the real world. Who cares about american redneck ^H^H^H^H^H idol or whatever? They should all be shot. Twice. With silver bullets, and all the things required to bury vampires, lest they not return from the grave. Honestly, is this the idea of a joke from the editors?

  33. I second that motion. by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    I move for a vote on the motion.

  34. Hacked or Failed? by phocion · · Score: 1

    Interesting. When I watched this (yes, I like this one reality show. Stop judging me.) I assumed the "inconsistencies" they mentioned were the results of someone trying to influence the vote. Reading TFA it sounds like it was more a case of some type of system failure. It would be nice if they were a bit more open about what went wrong, but since my predictions on who was going to get the most votes this week were correct I'm not too bothered by this. :)

    --
    Smile, it makes people wonder what you're up to.
  35. Re:Jeremiah Cornelius = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 0

    I fail while you Suck Seed - You blow dicks for nickels, 'til your throat trickles.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  36. Re:Jeremiah Cornelius: Quit "projecting"... apk by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 0

    OK, OCD.

    I think by your 100th post, everybody got your point.

    Now, take the Ritalin...

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  37. American Idol & The Voice RIGGED SCAM by Spaced714 · · Score: 1

    The other week American Idol negated all of the votes when Candice and Amber was in the bottom two. They also always claim that the results are given "In no particular order" however for the last three or four results shows they announced Candice as the first to go through(that was to make her appear as the top voted contestant). In my opinion they would not have put her first for those weeks, unless they were up to no good. Never mind that they had "Special Guest" come on stage and hug her and say how great she was two or three weeks in a row. They were obviously trying to sway peoples vote for her by giving her "ALL" of the attention. Also, they have been saying how good Cree was, that is until she started getting more votes than Candice. They also started putting Amber and Angie down, no matter how much better they sang. Then when Cree started getting more votes than Candice, they decided to get Angie voted for instead of Cree. Then low and behold Angie started getting more votes than Cree or Candice. All along they were putting Amber down and turning people against her till she was voted off. They knew that in the finale Candice wouldn't have a prayer against Angie so they had Harry Connick Jr. come on stage and vouch for Cree to get her voted for instead of Angie. For the last several shows the judges were bad-mouthing Amber, and then Angie in the last one or two shows. They were obviously better singers than Candice or the judges(especially OLD FAT AS* Randy)would not have put so much effort towards swaying the votes as they did. But they thought Angie was better than Candice. And that Candice had a better chance of winning against Cree. Since they had been putting her down for weeks. Candice could only sing good when she sang at the top of her lungs, and not very good even then. So, wouldn't you know all of her songs for the last three or four shows were all loud as* screaming songs. Otherwise she couldn't carry a tune in a bucket. If you ask me the final three should be Angie, Amber and Cree. But Old Fat AS* Randy would not allow that, because he's been trying to ram that amazon broad Candice down Americas throat. I just wish people wouldn't listen to the BS crap that the judges say and vote the way their ears tell them to. They did for a while, but a couple weeks ago they all got on the OLD FAT AS* Randy Jackson Bandwagon. I guess being a follower is better than voting for your favorite, even if they don't win. Not me. I still say Amber and Angie should be the last two standing. And that Cree is better than Candice on her worst day. As far as the voice their rig was different and mainly for money. They done away with all of those votes because the contestants that they want to go through were being voted off too. The means in which the deeds were done was different on each show but the desired results of the cheating were the same. They have pre-determined who they wanted to go through(to maintain a balanced demographic viewership) and who they want to win. That they are willing to do anything necessary to make their outcome happen. I believe that both shows have a problem with demographics. They have less and less minorities watching and voting because most of the winners are caucasian (especially on American Idol since this is only the third or forth season for the Voice). That they are willing to change the results and/or do away with votes(sound familiar Florida) to keep minority contestants on the show. Otherwise they would loose almost all of their minority viewers(and the money that goes with it). Never mind all of the other dirty underhanded tricks they(the producers and judges especially OLD FAT AS* Randy) pulls to try and sway the viewers votes. I think it all just stinks to high heaven. The judges should just critique the contestants and let the viewers chose the ones they like to win. And stop saying crap like "oh, you are the best one in the show." or "So and so is in it to win it." and the rest of their B.S. comments like that.

  38. Malaysia by Dabido · · Score: 1

    Thought this was going to be about the Malaysian elections recently, or even maybe the Pakistan ones ... but, it's about something unimportant that doesn't matter.

    --
    Sure enough, the cow costume was hanging up next to the superhero outfit and sailors uniform. (S,Spud)