Why Judges complain on Indian Idol 3 show?

This is just my opinion, and I'm not trying to portray this as truth by any means. So if you have any disagreements or alternative opinions, I'd definitely like to look forward to hear those.

I think, it's not in the interest of Sony Entertainment Television to find the best singer in the country. It is no secret that they are into business and not charity. Obviously they would design a program in such a way that it brings money to sony and popularity to it's show. If they find a good enough singer in the process and not the best, they don't mind. In fact I would not be surprised if the most consistent performer will not end up winning the contest, because that takes away the element of surprise or twist of the climax. The climax will be too dull if the consistent performer goes on to win. This is not in the best interests of the promoters of the show. The more controversial the show, the more popular the show becomes. May be it just represents the mediocrity of our society.

I was watching some archive videos of II2, and I was glad to stumble upon that video where the judges walk out on the elimination of one of the contestants (Amay Datey). This was very interesting, as the judges believed that Amay should be in based on his performances... and one of the program designers or some such personality tries to explain that that's the beauty of the show. If you like a performer, you should keep continuing to support him/her till the very end, she continues to explain. And if audiences' applause and judges' praise does not translate into votes, you basically can't complain. This was followed by an argument with one of the audiences and judges which was along the lines that when the program is designed in such a way that the person who gets more votes stays in, then what is the point in judges showing emotions.

To a large extent that sounded true. So let me come to the point which has driven me to spend some time to compile this message -- that is-- why do judges show emotions on this show?

I have greatest respects for Javed Akhtar, to be very honest the best part, again according to me, in Indian Idol is when contestants perform followed by the judges comments. These are the only things that make me watch the show. I would never miss Javed saab's keen observations. Actually, by far Javed saab has been great, even when his fellow judges were supporting inferior singers he was quite vocal in expressing his disappointment. It is an open secret that Anu Malik has a greater say in the matters than the other judges, although Javed saab has never let this affect his judgement not his functioning as a judge( if you have seen the video of wildcard contestants' selection, it was Javed saab's shrewdness or rather innate leadership quality that ensured Ankita made it to the galas(of course backed by her good performances), Anu Malik and Alisha were rooting for Suhit). Since Anu Malik has a greater say in the scheme of things, he'd like to function like a BOSS. and hence the personal comments. May be they are all playing to a script.

So my question is, when the program designers clearly say that it's the voting that defines the winner, why do judges blame janata? Aren't they explained the rules before signing on? or viewers are not alone being taken for a ride, huh?

If it were in the interest of Sony to find the best singer, as has been proved a number of times, voting may not be the best way to go. I'm speculating here as I don't know the voting rules, but I suspect a person can send in more than one vote. In this scenario, how can the results be fair? Even if people are voting based on performace, there's so much room in the format itlsef to take advantage of. Secondly,I believe , it takes money to vote!! -- so there you go -- one more way to exploit. With so many possibilities, how can we expect the voting to represent fairness?

And I'm sure with Anu Malik there on the judges' panel and with such powers, I suspect if we end up with a fair winner, even if the winner were to be chosen by the judges.

Although, to be fair -- Anu Malik has been very frank and forthright in most of his assessments, he was little too overt in certain conditions.

Thanks for you attention.