“American Idol’’ leaves the air Thursday as a diminished thing. In the last third of its 15-season run, after a string of crowned winners who will not be the next Kelly Clarkson-like hit or even the next Taylor Hicks-like miss, the show became rather “pitchy.’’
The TV singing contest that premiered with a bang in 2002 started going flat in the early 2010s, around the time Lee DeWyze, one of the show’s tiresome lineup of White Men With Guitars, became the champ and Ellen DeGeneres sat tossing off tepid, scripted quips from the judges’ panel. Once a ratings juggernaut for Fox, breaking records as the highest-rated US series for seven straight years, “Idol’’ lost its Nielsen mojo, falling out of the Top 10 and even losing sponsor Coca-Cola. The countrywide obsession petered out like one more sorry version of the show’s oft-covered “Against All Odds.’’
But in its prime, “American Idol’’ wasn’t just thoroughly entertaining and nation-unifying TV in the years after 9/11, a family series with fresh-faced talent for the kids and nostalgic cover songs — from Elvis Presley’s “A Little Less Conversation’’ to Leonard Cohen’s “Hallelujah’’ — for the folks. It was an innovative reality contest that changed the prime-time TV landscape, as well as the infrastructure of pop music. “Idol,’’ with its phone and later app voting process, transformed American audiences’ relationship with TV and music profoundly, at times inspiring some 122 million viewer votes in a week (by comparison, 129 million voted in the last presidential election).
With “Idol,’’ people had the power.
Essentially, the show took a lot of the pop star-making machinery away from the power brokers and tastemakers and made ordinary audience members into the producers of the American dream. Suddenly, we were the ones turning a nobody into a star — or even, in the cases of Clarkson and Carrie Underwood, a superstar. We had the muscle, en masse, to determine the general character of the contest — would we choose soul, or rock, or country competitors? — as well as the ultimate victor. There were entire episodes of “Idol,’’ before the 2010s ratings dives, devoted to the results of our judgments.
That shift to the viewer-voting model edged TV further into the democratization process that had already begun with the Internet. When “Idol’’ took off, YouTube, the DIY place where people now have even more power to make stars outside of corporate boardrooms, did not exist. The show provided the first major step toward genuine TV interactivity. “Idol’’ viewers weren’t just passive recipients of business decisions; we were engaged in them. Sure, early talent contests such as Boston’s own “Community Auditions’’ — which, by the way, still exists — had a primitive viewer-participation element, but the size and scope and ease of what “American Idol’’ created was unprecedented. At best, audience-applause meters are cute.
Since “Idol’’ premiered, viewer interactivity has spread from the voting shows — the “Idol’’ clones include “America’s Got Talent,’’ “The Voice,’’ and a few others — to scripted series. Now, when TV fans tweet their opinions, or form a movement to keep a show on the air, or push a couple together romantically, showrunners listen. They now take viewers’ desires seriously and interact with those sentiments in regular press interviews. With social media in the mix, we’re more empowered.
“American Idol’’ didn’t just enfranchise audiences, by the way; it schooled us, too. Host Ryan Seacrest has been the constant throughout the series, along with the format of mixing back stories with performances. But Simon Cowell, who sat on the original judges panel with Paula Abdul and Randy Jackson, defined the show with his spiky commentary.
Cowell was the judge who played the role of tough-loving teacher, walking contestants and audiences through the specific factors that make up American pop hits and stars. A successful record producer, he showed us that the voice is only a part of what makes a viable and effective performer. The look, confidence, self-knowledge, song choices — they’re all essential in the fame equation. With his fierce honesty and uncompromising standards, he tried to nudge audiences into being pickier about which performers we chose to embrace. If viewers were going to play a role in selecting stars, Cowell seemed to say, we would need to understand the pop arts from the inside out.
His brusqueness and honesty was entertaining, and his “Idol’’ gig — quickly notorious because, like many a pop star, he polarized audiences — inspired the placement of a tart British judge on many other TV judges panels. Also after “Idol,’’ other reality shows — “Project Runway,’’ “America’s Next Top Model,’’ “So You Think You Can Dance’’ — gave their judges’ panel a lot of prominence, with the mission to educate both audiences and contestants.
Audience empowerment has taken on huge new dimensions since the peaks of “American Idol’’ in the 2000s, with the likes of Kickstarter and crowdsourcing joining YouTube and social media. Those technological shifts certainly played a role in the show’s decline. Now, the election of a pop star through a TV show — a massive money-making TV show at that — isn’t especially exciting. At this point, if you’re a wannabe Madonna or the next Jennifer Hudson, you might just do it yourself.
Matthew Gilbert can be reached at gilbert@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @MatthewGilbert.
