Technically Incorrect

Many of you will, perhaps, remember how Woz was very suspicious (and then suspiciously changed his mind) about the voting on "Dancing with the Stars".

Now we are tormented with cries that local AT&T representatives in Arkansas gave lessons in sending up to 10 simultaneous texts to people at "American Idol" viewing parties. The surprise winner (to some, at least) was Kris Allen from Arkansas.

The New York Times reported Wednesday that Fox and the two companies that produce the show, FreemantleMedia North America and 19 Entertainment, denied that the "enthusiasm" of local representatives nefariously influenced the result.

After all, the "Idol" rule book states: "A weekly monitoring procedure will be in place to prevent individuals from unfairly influencing the outcome of the voting by generating significant blocks of votes using technical enhancements. The producers reserve the right to remove any identified 'power dialing' votes. Note that this applies to both toll-free and Text Messaging votes."

However, I have plowed through the whole of this rule book and can find no restrictions as to how many times you can actually vote.

The key word, therefore, is the word 'unfairly'.

(Credit: CC JonDissed/Flickr)

One has to assume the technology simply identifies multiple texts sent within nanoseconds of each other. Whereas the hands of normal human beings that would be voting have to at least pause to press send more than once.

Voting is open for a strict two-hour period after the show and only AT&T subscribers can vote by text. Everyone else has to call. There is even a little kink that those who happen to be outside of their phone's area code cannot vote.

So one has to wonder whether the actions of a few enthusiastic AT&T employees could really have swayed the results.

Strong rumors suggest the voting wasn't even close. So even if every single inhabitant of Arkansas voted 10 times, that would still only be around 28 million out of the allegedly 100 million votes cast.

And it's not as if this purported Arkansas cabal won't have been the only voting group out there. There is even a very fine site called "Vote For The Worst" which tries to get people to, indeed, use their cell phones to shoo in the least talented. Vote for the Worst is claiming that it put Allen over the top. Or under the bottom, depending on your perspective.

Naturally, one wonders about the wisdom of allowing people to vote multiple times. Money can be a wicked beast when trying to create reality show rules.

But it is surely far more likely that Arkansas' Allen, who was suitably middle-of-the-road and had never been in the bottom three, simply received far more votes than Adam Lambert, who hails from San Diego.

Lambert is the more original artist by far. But his black fingernails and rock diva personality are not so easily digested in the South.

And just in case none of you has noticed, only one "American Idol" winner has ever not come from the South. Yes, abstinence enthusiast Jordin Sparks from Arizona.

The fix, I fear, is out.

It is never my intention to spoil your most intimate pleasures.

However, what is left of my morality cannot hold back some new information about "American Idol."

I know many of you will be glued to your TVs on Tuesday to see what hot (for both sexes, I'm told) favorite Adam Lambert will be performing.

If you have been committed for the last 12 weeks to following this drama of the larynx and the tongue-lashing, you will know that the producers never reveal who actually gained the most votes in any particular week. This would, indeed, spoil the ratings. Um, I mean the high-quality entertainment.

However, a glitchette in the iTunes software seems to have revealed which of the contestants is enjoying the most downloaded love. And this just might be an indicator of voting patterns.

Adam Lambert, contemplating his downloads?

(Credit: "American Idol")

Lambert is, indeed, having the fruits of his vastly ranging throat downloaded the most.

However, in second place is not Danny Gokey, the gawky, raspy-voiced, nice chap, who dances as if he's wearing someone else's trousers.

No, in second place is Kris Allen. Yes, the short chap with the happy face and the, I don't know, mini-John Mayer demeanor--which, I suppose, is better than mini-Verne Troyer.

It seems unclear how the iTunes glitch occurred. Perhaps a fan of the sublimely powerful, cool, confident, deliciously pink-haired 16-year-old Allison Iraheta wanted to encourage more of her fans to get out the vote.

Perhaps it has something to do with Pirate Bay.

However, it surely will make everyone wonder just how many Steve Wozniak votes might have been left on the floor, or in the trash, on that other cultural votefest, "Dancing with the Stars."

The British are looking very hard in the mirror these days. Perhaps it is related to the belief that the country is running out of money.

In any case, who would have thought that they would choose to give up mandatory education about the Second World War and begin teaching their children about Twitter and Wikipedia?

The plans, leaked to the dastardly press (perhaps some devious cove just twittered a tiny URL to a password-protected site), give children relief from having to learn too many dates, place names, and pesky scientific formulas. You can google all that nonsense, anyway.

But if you can't tweet your progress in toilet training, what kind of adult can you expect to become?

The plans declare that children must leave primary school (to which children go until the unofficial drinking age of 11) fully conversant with the delights of blogging, podcasting, Wikipedia, and Twitter.

While I am aghast that Facebook appears not to be specifically mentioned, my eyes become moist when I see that children will be required to gain "fluency" in keyboard skills and learn to use a spellchecker.

"Very nice, miss. But when do we learn how to tweet our feelings?"

(Credit: CC Spiraltri3e)

Naturally, talking--and, presumably, typing--heads have already offered their 60 pence worth on the topic. Teresa Cremin, president of the U.K. Literary Association, worries about a lack of drama and "no emphasis on reading for pleasure."

Madam, please don't worry. We all read Twitter for pleasure. Can there be any other reason?

Other British critics seem to be worried that Twitter and Wikipedia are merely fads. But ladies and gentlemen, you are the great nation that brought us lasting pleasures such as "Dancing with the Stars," "American Idol," and the Dyson vacuum cleaner thingy. Things that the whole world marvels at and studies every day.

The creators of Twitter and Wikipedia can only hope to match the enduring quality of some of the great British contributions to history, science, and culture.

Everyone says Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak is a nice man. He's Polish, of course.

However, in an e-mail to his Facebook Support Group, posted at 6 a.m. PST Tuesday, the Woz appears to be getting very, very ratty. And the rodent that he's smelling is the ABC production team of "Dancing with the Stars."

He is suspicious that the true voting numbers, both from telephone and online voting, are never revealed. This leads him to believe that he may be forced into the two-couple dance-off, just to boost ratings.

"The producers play games to get viewers and don't disclose the numbers. If they disclosed the numbers, it would be less of a game, but still suspect. If tomorrow, they claim I'm in the bottom 2 dance teams, including viewer votes, I believe that it's an outright lie," he said.

He has begun to make his accusations in ABC interviews too.

"I called it fake about 20 times today on camera," he said. "Each time in the same sentence as whatever comment they wanted about doing a dance-off tomorrow. That way, they couldn't edit it easily to say what they wanted. They kept trying to get me to say what I'd do if I was in the dance-off without using the word fake."

Woz, with saintly background.

(Credit: CC Jeff Dlouhy)

He even accuses producers of getting him to say things that are simply untrue: "They will have some small video tomorrow of me saying things that I strongly told them I don't believe. They will also shoot me in a one-hour rehearsal tomorrow with my partner, but I'll keep calling the idea of my being in the bottom 2, after audience participation, a lie."

Although he is not clear about all the sources of his suspicions, his accusations are extremely open: "I'm sure they want me in this dance-off to get higher Tuesday ratings, and they have preplanned it so that I win. If my leg acts up tomorrow, they will either have to announce another pair as being the lowest or send me home, and I don't think they will give me up."

Well, at least he thinks he's going to win, even though his performance Monday night still didn't reach the standards he might wish for himself.

Seemingly straining to be nice, he admitted that he is straining to be nice: "It's hard to get all this out politely, challenging the truthfulness of reporting of our dance team positions. But I am who I am, and I speak my mind and hate these unethical twists. I'm not after any Hollywood existence."

He continued: "I have vowed to all my friends that I will not change in that way; I won't go over the line. I'm here to help others appreciate dancing. But that doesn't mean I have to compromise my ethics very much."

It is heartening to see the word "ethics" being used in association with reality television. Especially on the day when a supposed "American Idol" insider declared that the top-four retinue (there are still 11 hopefuls left in the competition) has already been decided.

You just can't miss "Dancing with the Stars" tonight, can you? 9 p.m. PST and EST. And 8 p.m. in the the Central Ethical Zone. What will the Woz say and do next?

I am fascinated by Stephen Shankland's post concerning Udi Manber's speech to the Gilbane Conference.

No, of course I have no idea what the Gilbane Conference is, but Mr. Manber is apparently Google's Vice President of Engineering in charge of search.

In his view, while the 20th Century was about conquering nature, the 21st is about understanding people.

About time someone did, if you ask me.

The most interesting part of Mr. Manber's speech was when he described the difficulties in understanding even searches that seem abundantly clear, like "hairstyles for ears that stick out."

Which led me to wish I had been at the Gilbane Conference.

Because the question I would have asked would have been: "Why, sir, do you think I know about David Cook's nether regions?"

(Credit: megan383)

For those of you who are still sane, Mr. Cook was the winner of this year's American Idol.

And I admit to having occasionally written a post or two on my less serious blog, Pond Culture, concerning this hypnotic car accident of a show.

Thanks to the cleverness of Wordpress's software, I can see every day what search terms led readers to my site.

One that kept coming up again and again was "David Cook ****."

I have blanked, or rather starred, a vulgar reference to the male private area.

I apologize unreservedly. I only include reference to this colloquial term for male membership in the interests of science.

And justice.

The fact is that I never wrote anything about Mr. Cook's nether regions. I never thought about writing about Mr. Cook's nether regions. And I have never actually thought about Mr. Cook's nether regions.

Really.

No, really.

Why would Google include my site on the search list of these Lucifers from Pervertia?

If no one had, indeed, written about Mr. Cook's reproductive regions, why not simply return a verdict of 'nothing found'?

Of course, then I made the mistake of actually complaining on my blog. And now my blog is the number one in Google search for that vile phrase.

Please understand me, Mr. Manber. This is clearly a case of evil done.

You have to do something about it.

You got me into this mess in the first place.

This blog awaits your response.

I will search "Google solves American Idol reproductive misunderstanding" every day until we have achieved a resolution.