But as actually anything what has to be said is said here: http://www.cracked.com/funny-4061-valentines-day/ I'll restrain from posting my own comments.
While writing this I am watching a casting show seeking the german performer for the "european song contest" (formerly Grand Prix de la Chanson) which actually demonstrates what happend to the entertainment business.
While the Grand Prix tried to celebrate a "good" song it seems more important to provide a good performance. As twisted as the idea to judge a performance may seem the idea of music - even pop music - has been to produce *good* music. Now it's rather important to produce "successful" music. And the result are clones of the already successful performances which are repeated over and over again. No wonder that the great stars of the pop and rock business are the same as in my youth.
In the meantime "good" and "successful" are used exchangeable. All for the show ...
Possibly the wish to be respected for doing something of quality would lead to more quality?
BTW: I don't think performances wouldn't differ in quality - I just doubt the idea that a public voting will result in the "best". And I have to admit: I would rather send someone performing a "good" song than someone performing something mediocre. What makes a "good" song? I would be open to discuss this question. There are a lot of possible criterion. But public voting ain't one of them.
And another point : the casting show doesn't vote the song but the performer - so what the f**** is the decision is about? The nicest face? The most friendly performance?