Looking for good ‘Season 3’ programme

Sirasa Super Star Season 2' which attracted country- wide attention ranging from the President of the Country to the resident in the country-side is over! We acknowledge with applause the commendable efforts of the organizers for unleashing the hidden musical talent of our rural youth in a carnival of glamour, pomp and pageantry which reached a crescendo at a grand finale Sugathadasa indoor stadium recently.

In the aftermath, we now hear of Postmortems and Autopsies dissecting the methodology adopted to select the 'Super star'. Most of us are aware that the selection was based on 'SMS' and telephone message votes sent by the people starting from a particular stage in the contest. This may be in keeping with the 'American Idol' Programme which is replicated in other countries as well where almost every citizen owns a mobile or a land phone and where only real music lovers will vote sans undue influence or duress in a contest of this nature.

BB But as we know, in this country any public competition or contest tend to be rigged, distorted or if not skewed due to irregular methods of canvassing adopted by the contestants and their supporters exacerbated by an imperfect voting system loaded with loophole.

In a country where the electoral system itself is entrenched in an antagonistic preference or 'manapey' voting scheme, it is no doubt difficult to wean the public away from adopting such irregular methods even in competitions of this nature. Therefore, to make' Season 3', less criticized, fairer and equitable I suggest that instead of one 'Super Star' the contest should produce 4 winners viz. Best Male Super star, Best Female Super star, Most popular Male Super star and Most popular Female Super star.

In considering this option the organizers will no doubt have to set aside the theory that 'there can be only one Super star' in favour of fairness and equity. If this concept is accepted, the following method can be adopted. Introduce' SMS' voting system after selecting the 100 finalists. (I presume this is already being done.) However, such SMS or telephone votes should be counted on the basis of one vote per one phone number at each round to reduce the element of 'unfairness' that can be created by contestants or voters who are prepared to spend money lavishly. It should also be noted that this system is inherently 'unfair' to the extent that all keen music lovers in our country are not armed with telephones to vote.

Nevertheless, this shortcoming can be tolerated if only the so called Most popular male and female super star' will be selected by this method. It is also important for this method to be transparent by announcing the number of votes received by the contestant at each stage or at least at the finals.

Only one panel of judges (acceptable to the music field) should make the selections from the '100 finalists' stage upwards. 50 Males and 50 Females would make up this hundred and the selection would thereafter be done separately for the two streams viz. most popular and the best Super Star.

Since we are talking of Super stars, it is assumed that the judges will allocate marks also for traits such as professional music qualifications, presentation style, personality and ability to play musical instruments when selecting the' Best 'category among the' 100 finalists'. Also, these traits should have been taken in to account in general during the elimination rounds before they reached the '100 finalists' stage.

It would be more equitable and fair, if the difference between the value of prizes for the 12 finalists (6 males and 6 females) is narrowed down as all of them are almost equally good.

As regards the presentation of the programme, while commending the dramatic style coupled with superb editing, sounds and technical effects, I would suggest that from an audience and a TV viewer perspective, it would be more attractive if more than one presenter is made available so that they could interact with the audience and the viewer at home in a more pleasant and a relaxed manner with an added dash of humour.

More importantly, they should not drag the announcement of the result to a point of annoying or embarrassing not only the contestants but also the audience and the viewer at home.

As regards the final programme, despite the organizers spending so much of money and time and wanting to do justice to the100 finalists we exhort that from an audience, viewers and a country perspective, a time span of 3 hours is more than ample.

I am sending this proposal to the TV Times in order to entertain counter proposals from those persons who are genuinely interested in seeing a fair and equitable contest under' season 3'. I am also confident that the organizers will take up this proposal and comments in the correct spirit as coming from a' constructively critical' viewer of the 'Sirasa Super Star Programme'