Australian Idol & Current Affair Age discrimination story
Tue, 31 Aug 2004, 01:43 pmWalter Plinge14 posts in thread
Australian Idol & Current Affair Age discrimination story
Tue, 31 Aug 2004, 01:43 pmDo you think performers over the age of 28year olds should apply?.
Did you see the 40's something chap on a current affair show not so long ago who's taking Grundy's (I think) to the courts for discrimination.
All I can say is GO FOR IT. There are plenty of talented performers out there who are in their late twenties, thirties and forties, plus.
When the reporter on the current affair started interviewing people on the street about their thoughts on the matter they simply replied anyone who wishes to apply should be given the chance. They even went on further to say age does not matter if your talented.
I hope this guy wins in court. Hopefully the rules will change for 2005. Stay tuned for the results, I hope there is no hush money involved.
Cheers
Smiles
JB
Did you see the 40's something chap on a current affair show not so long ago who's taking Grundy's (I think) to the courts for discrimination.
All I can say is GO FOR IT. There are plenty of talented performers out there who are in their late twenties, thirties and forties, plus.
When the reporter on the current affair started interviewing people on the street about their thoughts on the matter they simply replied anyone who wishes to apply should be given the chance. They even went on further to say age does not matter if your talented.
I hope this guy wins in court. Hopefully the rules will change for 2005. Stay tuned for the results, I hope there is no hush money involved.
Cheers
Smiles
JB
Re: Australian Idol & Current Affair Age discrimination stor
Tue, 31 Aug 2004, 04:56 pmWalter Plinge
I agree with the idea of anyone being able to apply AND audition, absolutely no question on that.
Here it comes, the but.
But what they (the organisers of "idol" etc) are looking for is an image, as well as talent that will appeal to "the market", and sadly as you get older the talent quotient has to go higher to make the same overall impact. The market does have a predilection for new, young and good-looking talent.
This, I think, is only true in the main as far as making a break into the industry, because once you are in, all you have to do is maintain it, the talent level that is. Look at all the older rock & roll and pop stars who made their break in the 50's and 60's and are still hanging on and are by no means physically attractive as they once were (although I must admit Olivia does still look rather nice)!
Many would (and do) say how did the Spice Girls and Bardot ever get a recording contract(s)? They weren't that bad. However, don't forget they were manufactured groups who were overnight sensations.
Now, being a bloke the first thing one notices is that they are fairly attractive members of the opposite gender - that is the first hurdle overcome. They LOOK good! As much as anyone would like to state you can't judge a book etc... we are humans and that is what we do, it is primal. Then, if they can do something that is better, or more talented than us, they are on the way to that "stardom". So we have reasonable looks and ability. With some additional coaching, (not exorbitant) weÂ’ve got ourselves a star.
Can we see where this is going?
The forty something yearold chap may very well be talented but to get him marketed to the masses would be nigh on impossible. I, too hope he wins his day in court.
I guess a current prime example of this marketability would be the string quartet Bond. They have been around for a few years and have just had one of their pieces (Explosive) used as the theme for the Seven NetworkÂ’s Olympic Games coverage.
OK, so they play tarted-up versions of the classics, but by crikey they look good, sound alright - and one of them is a local sheila.
Here it comes, the but.
But what they (the organisers of "idol" etc) are looking for is an image, as well as talent that will appeal to "the market", and sadly as you get older the talent quotient has to go higher to make the same overall impact. The market does have a predilection for new, young and good-looking talent.
This, I think, is only true in the main as far as making a break into the industry, because once you are in, all you have to do is maintain it, the talent level that is. Look at all the older rock & roll and pop stars who made their break in the 50's and 60's and are still hanging on and are by no means physically attractive as they once were (although I must admit Olivia does still look rather nice)!
Many would (and do) say how did the Spice Girls and Bardot ever get a recording contract(s)? They weren't that bad. However, don't forget they were manufactured groups who were overnight sensations.
Now, being a bloke the first thing one notices is that they are fairly attractive members of the opposite gender - that is the first hurdle overcome. They LOOK good! As much as anyone would like to state you can't judge a book etc... we are humans and that is what we do, it is primal. Then, if they can do something that is better, or more talented than us, they are on the way to that "stardom". So we have reasonable looks and ability. With some additional coaching, (not exorbitant) weÂ’ve got ourselves a star.
Can we see where this is going?
The forty something yearold chap may very well be talented but to get him marketed to the masses would be nigh on impossible. I, too hope he wins his day in court.
I guess a current prime example of this marketability would be the string quartet Bond. They have been around for a few years and have just had one of their pieces (Explosive) used as the theme for the Seven NetworkÂ’s Olympic Games coverage.
OK, so they play tarted-up versions of the classics, but by crikey they look good, sound alright - and one of them is a local sheila.
- ···
- ···
- ···