X Factor

A few days ago, I discussed Big Brother. Here, I look at another phenomenon, even bigger than BB, that is just days away from its new series: The X Factor.

 

No, not the finishing move or gang created by the wrestler X-Pac (don't worry, only those who watch WWE will get that); it's the show that has grown from a showcase for new talent to the biggest talent show of all-time! Well, that's what ITV would tell you.

 

Depending on who you speak to, X Factor 2011 will either be a huge letdown, due to the absence of Simon Cowell and Cheryl Cole, or the start of an exciting and, perhaps, improved chapter in the show's history, due to the absence of, er, Simon Cowell and Cheryl Cole.

 

But regardless of whether ratings remain high and if the bickering between judges gets better or worse, the question must be asked: after seven years, how much life is left in the X Factor?

 

A look into its background may help . . .

 

The show that we know today began life as Popstars in 2001. This was very different to the modern programme: this was designed to find five singers and put them all into one final group. It was every man (and woman) for himself; the band members may not have even lived in the same region of the country, yet they would end up performing together. Another important element was that everything was pre-taped, from the auditions to the judge's selection of the final band members to the release of their first single. Lastly, the general public had no - as in, zero - input into the programme, besides buying the song and watching the show. For those who complain that their favourite never got enough votes nowadays, consider the time when, if your hero never made it, well it was tough.

 

This met with tremendous success, leading to Pop Idol later in the year - wherien solo artists would be found, then the audience would keep its favourites in via live trials (albeit in a studio wherein only judges were present), and finally the live shows wherein, week by week, the field would dwindle until only one remained. This was even more successful, and made stars not only of the winner (Will Young), but those who weren't victorious (Gareth Gates, Darius). Both shows returned between 2002 and 2004, before the arrival of . . . ta da! The X Factor.

 

This allowed for most age ranges, and all combinations (young, old, group). The judges included Simon Cowell, who had by now become a bigger star than most of the previous acts, if not all of them.

 

Long story short: since then, each series has garnered huge ratings, and many successful acts, whether they won or not, have been established. The judges themselves have become bigger names than they already were: for all their wealth, people like Cowell and Louis Walsh weren't really known before these programmes. Now, people can't help but recognise them.

 

But this is a big year - oh, yes! There are new judges, as Simon takes up the "special appearance" role and Cheryl Cole has - well, you probably know already about her. The changes have led some to speculate that this year's X Factor will tank, and possibly be the beginning of the end for the show.

 

And there are a few reasons why this may actually be a good thing.

 

Don't get me wrong, it remains compelling viewing, but after seven years of the same format, to me the show has gotten more than a little stale. Granted, there are new judges - but I don't think that this will make a big difference. If anything, it may dilute the entertainment that comes from the frequent disagreements.

 

Oh, yes, the judges. At one time, they lived up to their name: Nigel Lythgoe in 2001 was there to judge talent, not to create a TV moment every time he spoke. In the last few years, however, a show can't go by without a pantomine performance that allows the good guys and bad guys to shine. Okay, some of their banter is funny - but isn't the show about the acts? Or do they merely provide a base for the "hilarious" Louis Walsh to insult a fellow judge in a way that even kids in Year 5 would deem embarrassing? After years of this, I am a tad bored.

 

As for the acts themselves: I like how the show provides a format for the singers to finally make it big. But, again, the structure is staler than last week's Hovis. For instance, the "sob story" is so common, it was used to mock the show by Peter Kay in his 2008 spoof (the name of which is too long for me to write here). I haven't got a problem with someone who has a troubled past and tries to make a better future for themselves. But, by watching X Factor, you'd think that most of the UK population had all just recovered from a terrible moment mere hours ago.

 

Even the production has become dull. Have you ever watched an act audition, and wondered if they'll advance - only for some positive Westlife song to fade in, thereby ruining the suspense and giving away what happens? That it's often the same song (and one produced, not so coincidentally, by Louis Walsh) also doesn't help.

 

But the worst part is its effect on the music industry, and television. To start with, ITV tailor their whole year around the August-December marathon, which means their Saturday night line-up for the rest of the year reeks of laziness. (Some would say that applies to ITV as a whole, but that's besides the point.) What gets me, though, is how the prestige of the Christmas Number One has been shattered. This used to be the big one for musicians: it was like winning the FA Cup Final. But, since 2005, every year but one has seen the winner get the Xmas #1.

 

Some may say that shows the power of the, er, show. But I say it's because X Factor exploits the modern-day "social network" audience, who are easily influenced by the show and are brainwashed into immediately purchasing a single online that, deep down, they may not even like but, because it's X Factor-related, they get it. It means now that bookmakers take odds on who will finish #2, because X Factor has padlocked the #1 spot and thrown away the key.

 

Only a Facebook campaign (for a track even worse than the X Factor hit) stopped the show getting #1 in 2009. That may indicate that the programme is not invincible, but it does show how desperate people are to stop it, and how fed up people are that the X Factor winner gets - not earns - the biggest musical prize of the year before, in many cases, fading into obscurity. Heck, even music channels, when listing the Xmas #1 of the last few decades, end their list before the X Factor started. People complain that only Celtic and Rangers can win the SPL, but at least there are still two potential winners - not one.

 

I haven't written this to be a misery, by the way; just to express some opinions. I don't hate the programme, but feel some aspects could be improved, or removed. X Factor does have its benefits, of course: it rakes in millions of viewers at a time when we have more channels than ever before; it provides undiscovered talent, who otherwise may never have made it, with a chance to become a huge star within weeks; and it provides Gary Barlow with a job while Take That write their next album. And, for all its faults, it provides entertainment, glamour and talent in a way that no other show does.

 

However, there is a chance that the bubble has burst. This isn't 2001, when the concept was a novelty. In 2011, the format has been used repeatedly and, although ratings remain high, I can't imagine that the show has gotten better by the year, unless the acts have talent.

 

And that's what it's really about: showcasing talent. Never mind the auditions, the judges, the loveable antics of Olly Murs: the show exists, primarily, to promote and build new stars. But what if X Factor disappears?

 

ITV won't want this to happen, of course, nor do many others. Britain loves the X Factor, and couldn't cope without it. But the same was said of Big Brother - and, although it is coming back, it was eventually cancelled, mainly due to lack of interest in a stale format.

 

Could this happen to X Factor? I don't know. I can see the benefits of such an occurence, but wouldn't say that I wish for it to become a reality (Pun intended). At this point, it's extremely unlikely. But you can't rule it out: even the greatest concept eventually grows old.

 

So, whilst the judges may add a new coat of paint, the house still looks the same. (Wow, that was poetic.) I think this has to be a big year on-screen for X Factor, because if the show turns out to be far less appealing than in previous years, it's the X Factor that will face the judges. Enjoy this year's show, if you can - because, if you don't, and don't in the years to come, not even ITV will have the X Factor.