The Instigator
Pro (for)
1 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
11 Points

American Idol is rigged

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/7/2011 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,958 times Debate No: 19728
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)




It's true. American Idol is not a fair game. Aside from becoming boring after way too many seasons, it is not a true quest to find real talent.

People think you walk right in and see Simon, Paula, and Randy (or now, Randy, JLo, and Steven Tyler) and audition your first audition. Um.. WRONG. You go to some arena near you, wait around with at least 17,000 other people for over 10 hours, and audition for some random dude who has no authority and who knows, he might even be a janitor. You sing for an average length of four seconds while he scratches his back and says you're not good enough. Then, the person after you comes in dressed as a Tellitubi and makes it to the next round. That's how it goes people. And that's only round one. You still have to pass a few more to get to the "official judges".

It's not even worth it in the long run. This show is not played fair, and the most talented singers don't even get a shot. Vote Pro- American Idol is rigged.


I accept. There is no argument here to say that the competition is rigged. For something to be rigged, it must be shown to have had a form of rigging, or the show / results must have been fraudulently presented in order to benefit a specific member. My opponent has to show this, and I have to simply show that there is within reasonable doubt that it is not rigged.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for accepting.

American Idol, once again, is most definitely RIGGED. And yes, the word RIGGED is the proper term I am meaning to use. Not just "unfair" or anything like that.

This passed summer at the Izod Center arena, New Jersey, around 16,000 to 18,000 young folks came out to audition for the show. Probably less than 500 (that's only an estimate, I have no actual proof of the number) of them actually made it through to the next round. Contestents were forced to wait hours and hours for their 5 seconds of fame. There were a line of judging tables smack dab in the middle of the loud arena. One judge at each table, and curtains diving each one, almost like voting booths. The next day on Izod's website, there were many bulletins and blogs with people writing of their experience at the auditions. Almost every one of them- negative! Some people claimed that "only judges at booth/table 1, 2, 7, and 10 would pass people. Others said they just opened their mouth and didn't even get a sound out before they were refused. Also, there were no papers to fill in, so these judges had no idea what the age of the contestant was- He or she could be either 16 or 30! Hmmm?

Then, one girl posted that she auditioned for booth 8. This judge must have really liked her, because she was allowed a full minute to sing. The judge smiled, and grabbed the judge at booth 7. The girl sang again. There was a lot of whispering going on between the judges. Then, judge 8, seeming hopeful, asked for the girl's age to use as an argument. She said she was 19. The two judges then whispered again and judge 7 gestured a "no". Then, a disappointed judge 8 gave her the boot.

Does that seem a bit odd or what??

Now, the competition heats up as contestants are sent to Hollywood, and eventually a top 12 is chosen.

Colleen Smith, staff reporter at, was able to prove that the votes are counted on Diebold Hardware.
This is her artical, found at

Election scandal has come to America's favorite reality show. Fans have suspected that something was amiss since Ruben Studdard, and now the cat is out of the bag. The most popular singers have not been winning. The voices of voters across this great land have not been heard. Accusations of Paula Abdul having an affair with a contestant, and Simon Cowell kicking puppies are insignificant compared to this. I spoke to an insider at Diebold whom I will refer to as "Woody". He says that the RIAA are the real snake in the grass here. The whole point of the show is to sell records, and the executives of the record labels allegedly know better than the viewing public what they can sell. They run the show behind the scenes, and contracted with Diebold to tabulate the votes as they saw fit. As Joseph Stalin said, those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything.

An independent audit was done of actual phone logs the nights of the shows. In season three, Latoya London had gotten the most calls each week, but Diebold machines declared her a loser in one of the late elimination rounds. Based on phone logs however, there is no way that Fantasia was the most popular. Leah LaBelle was also ousted before her fans stopped calling.

Season four also showed wide discrepancies between phone logs and official tallies. Carrie Underwood should have been voted off a considerable time before the finals, yet was ultimately declared the winner in spite of Bo Bice lighting up switchboards on a consistent basis.

I sought out comment from the first, and only confirmed legitimate winner of the contest, Kelly Clarkson. She refused to speak to me, but I cannot help but suspect she learned of this sham long before I did, and that is why she has refused to allow current contestants to perform her songs. She did not even thank the show in her acceptance speech at the Grammy Awards.

Can season five be saved, or is another phony champion going to be pushed on America by Diebold and the RIAA? Perhaps the American people can still make a difference. Call Fox Television and let them know that you won't stand for this. The very institution of reality television is at stake. Call them today!

This artical just makes me mad... mad at the SHOW. How can you say that it's not rigged after all this??


Let me go through my opponent's points before my own.

The first couple of paragraphs seems like nothing of value: uncited, personal subjective rubbish. If I went on a forum and posted that I was a judge and that the whole thing was rigged means nothing. What some people say on a forum means the equivalent. On top of that, people have very subjective experiences, and would almost always think they did brilliantly, even if they sounded like a cat drowning.

Regarding Colleen Smith and uncoverer, I reject this as a citation. The website is ridiculous and is pandering for attention, look at some of their other works [1]. Nothing cited, nothing written with any real value, except things that you'd agree with if you already did.

And that is all. The final paragraph is simply copy-paste from their website. There is no reason to say with certainty of any value that it is rigged, and my opponent has not shown any. If there is no evidence to suspect foul play, we cannot rationally agree with this contention. Thank you.;
Debate Round No. 2


StilettoStomper forfeited this round.


No argument or refutation was challenged, and all still stand. Thank you for this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by OberHerr 6 years ago
Curious how Pro will prove that it is rigged. But I will be following
Posted by Maikuru 6 years ago
This topic is fantastic and I laughed out loud when I read the title. Keep it up.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by OberHerr 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: He refuted her arguments perfectly, and she forfeited the last round, so so conduct goes to SH. Her grammar and spelling could have stood improvement.
Vote Placed by lannan13 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:16 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfitted, round goes to Con