How "American Idol" messed things up

Well, I haven't been blogging much lately. Sorry about that. But it's all for a good cause, I assure you. For those of you who don't know, I have been writing for the Deseret News in Salt Lake City for the past month and a half. It has been totally awesome and I absolutely love it. However, that does give me considerably less time to just sit down and write "for fun" these days. As part of my job with the newspaper, I have had the fun opportunity to follow the journeys of a handful of Utah girls that were featured on season 13 of "American Idol." That opportunity came to an abrupt end after last night's "Top 15" girls took the stage. Well, I mean to say that some of the "Top 15" took the stage. And that's where my issue really begins.

I hadn't watched "American Idol" in years. The last time I watched was back when I furiously voted to prevent Adam Lambert from winning. (Check!) So it had been, what? Five years, I think, since I'd tuned in. Too many old judges leaving, too many new judges coming in, and too many new judges leaving. It was too confusing, too dramatic, and, let's be honest - once Simon Cowell left, so did most of the viewers. With this new opportunity to follow the show, I actually found myself really getting into it. The new judges - especially Harry Connick, Jr., on whom I have quite the man-crush - are fantastic, they're family friendly, and they're fun to watch. "'American Idol' may finally have revived itself!" I thought.

When the shows went live last night, things went downhill fast.

After over 200 contestants were given golden tickets to fly out to Hollywood Week, the judges had slowly slimmed their numbers down to 30 - 15 guys and 15 girls. Among the 15 girls were two Utah contestants. I thought they were both pretty good, so I was excited to see if they could crack the Top 10 this week.

"Idol" introduced a new "Rush Week" concept, which I'm not sure I totally understand. Seacrest likened it to the Greek system that is not uncommon in many an American university, saying that "Idol" would showcase its talent, then America would get a chance to "pledge" their allegiance to the contestants they liked most. Then he dropped the bombshell, explaining that only 10 of the 15 girls in the backstage holding room would get the opportunity to perform for America's votes.

I thought our Utah girls would be in, easy. They'd both been pretty popular throughout the auditions stages and even got their fair share of face time, so I wasn't too concerned. Five performances later, I started to worry. Six, seven, eight. There were only two spots left and neither of the Utahns had been called to the stage. The ninth name didn't belong to either of the girls, which meant that at least one of them would be going home. When the judges described their 10th performer as a "big personality," it was almost like you could see the excitement drain out of our poor Utah girls' faces. It wasn't going to be them. I knew it and they knew it. They were both going to be eliminated.

Five minutes later, the two Utahns, along with three other unfortunate contestants, were beckoned to the stage, where they were promptly thanked for their time and dismissed. The credits rolled, Seacrest plugged the next night's show, and that was it.

"Thanks for playing." Photo: American Idol / Fox

That's just plain stupid.

Why did they narrow the field down to 15 when they knew all along that five of them wouldn't get to perform? Why didn't they just narrow it down to 10 to begin with?

Why drag it out for the girls? They kept them cooped up all night long with cameras in their faces and, in the end, they wouldn't even get a whiff of that live, national airtime. Why not just eliminate them at the beginning of the show?

I'm sure the network's answer to my last question is simple: ratings. If you eliminate five girls right off the bat, people like me, who were specifically watching for two girls that wouldn't even get a chance to sing, would tune out right then. (In fairness, I would have.) But here's the thing - some of the 10 girls that did perform were terrible! Nerves got the best of at least four of the contestants, in my opinion, partially because they were forced to run down an incredibly long hallway right before getting to the stage (and J-Lo pointed that out twice), but also because they didn't know that they would actually be singing until about two minutes before the music hit. Letting the girls know whether they would actually be going on stage that night would have allowed them time to mentally prepare for their performance.

Another big problem I had last night was the same problem I have with many talent-based reality shows: I felt like, for the first time all season, I was being force-fed liberal lifestyles.

One contestant, openly lesbian, complained in one of last week's shows that, no matter how talented she was, many people would hate her simply because of the lifestyle she has chosen to live. No offense, and bless her heart, but living an alternative lifestyle should not guarantee you more airtime than anybody else. Obviously, FOX is not going to admit to that, but I can almost guarantee that this girl was given a shot to perform in order to avoid any potential backlash by the LGBT community if she was dismissed as one of the "remaining five." After her performance, she was greeted by a prolonged standing ovation. Seacrest made a point to comment that the singer's "two moms" must be proud. J-Lo looked like she was on the verge of tears. I'm sorry, but I thought this was a singing competition!

Other spots in the Top 10 were given to those who had big personalities or caused some sort of ruckus in Hollywood week and one spot was given to a girl who said she wanted to be remembered for her brightly colored lipstick. Lipstick Girl botched her song - probably the worst performance of the night, in my opinion - but my, those were some big, bright lips!

The final thing that really bothered me about last night's performance what how incredibly liberal the audience was. For the third time this season, Harry Connick, Jr., called out a young female contestant for singing "Paris (Ooh La La)" by Grace Potter & the Nocturnals. After the performance, Connick asked the 18-year-old to speak the first two lines of the song.

"You've got me down on the floor," she recited. "So what you bring me down here for?"

In his post-performance feedback, Connick repeatedly asked the contestant if that was the kind of girl she wanted to be seen as. He asked her what the song was about. The girl responded that it was about a woman who gets what she wants. The largely female studio audience roared its shrill, high-pitched approval. The wild support from the audience really bothered me. Editing in the season so far has really tried to put Connick in a negative light, often referring to him as "Harsh Harry," but I've got no problem with him calling these girls out for inappropriate song choices.

In the end, my days of covering "American Idol" have run their course and I won't likely set time aside to watch the show for the remainder of the season, other than maybe an occasional glance to see who's doing well. With NBC's "The Voice" starting up next week, I needed to clear four hours of time from my busy schedule of TV watching, anyway. I just wish that "Idol" would have left off on a more positive note.

A-Town, out.