There has been a lot of buzz this week, starting with votefortheworst.com, that several of this year's "American Idol" auditioners are actually failed professional musicians. Last night three contestants who were on camera --Carly, David and Michael -- are exposed to have questionable cause to be called "amateur." But is this really any different than Gina Glocksen singing in a bar band? Or Jordin Sparks, last year's winner, who is the daughter of a professional football player? Surely being the child of a pro athlete opens some doors. Does it matter to you in terms of the competition?
Is an auditioner like off-key Monique preferable to a professional?
David won "Star Search" as a child (he is still only 16). Carly had a record contract, and her debut album sold 300 copies its first week! Michael had a record deal as well. Although the judges did not point out these achievements, do you expect "Idol" contestants to be total amateurs, people who have never sung in public before? Is that realistic? What does that say about Gina, who we know sang in bar bands in the area?
The bottom line is, do you expect more "reality" from "American Idol" than you do from any other reality show? And is that fair?
I think professionals competing is OK, if you want to call them that. I think it's every contestant's dream--even those who may be working singers--to have Idol take their careers to the next level and make them superstars.