THE EDITOR, Sir:
I am writing in response to the Letter of the Day, published in the Gleaner on Thursday, December 22, 2005 entitled "Better Format Needed to Rate Talent Contests".
It was clearly the opinion of the writer that Oberlin High School, the winners of the competition should not have won. I beg to disagree. I must admit that I am a supporter of Oberlin High, but I believe that their overall performance was satisfactory enough for them to be crowned winners. All the schools that made it to the finals could have won, but in the end Oberlin won by popularity.
You argue that when the public makes "careless choices" based on the contestant of their choice, it defeats the purpose of the competition. Tell me, what constitutes a "careless choice"? Your choice of contestant was Cornwall College; if you had voted, would you have considered your choice a careless one?
Let's be realistic. We all know that voting via text messaging or calling was a marketing strategy. In Jamaican terms, 'a money mekkin ting'. That was obvious in the prices of calls/texts. This method of choosing winners on our reality programmes is certainly not a new concept to Jamaica and has been embraced by the Jamaican public at large. It is the writer's opinion that whether the winner was decided by a public vote or by that of the judges, there would have been disagreement with the judge's selection. We all want our favourite contestant to win.
I am, etc.,
NATASH IRONS
Glengoffe P.O., St. Catherine
