English (UK)
p1. Introduction:
1.1 The idea:
1.2 The innovative element: Anonymity.
p2. The concept:
2.1 The jury:
2.2 Theme nights
p3. Other option for set up show:
3.1 Performance:
3.2 Sign up:
3.3 Independence:
p4. What can the winner actually win?
4.1 Age:
4.2 Integrity:
4.3 Subject to change:
p1. Introduction:
After years of enjoying talent shows with talented (and less talented) participants, we have reached a point that in the past 5 to 10 years there has been little to no development / renewal, so that many people no longer have the urge to follow the entire process from start to finish. Yes, there are still enough fans left for some shows and yes, there will always be enough participants in those shows but now it’s really time for a different, new concept. I hereby present to you the concept for a new talent show with an innovative element that really will be very attractive to both candidates and viewers. The title of the new show: Led us sing (subject to change).
1.1 The idea:
Led us sing is a new talent show that looks for the voice and the artist to launch a (potentially) new music star. Nationally and, if possible, also internationally. I hear you thinking “nothing new”. And that’s true. Partly. Shows in which people look for (singing) talent have been and will be around for a very long time. If not, forever. The trick is not to reinvent the wheel but to renew/adapt it every time in such a way that it is always new for the viewer and therefore surprising. Which is exactly what Led us sing will bring us.
In every country we have a lot of musical talent, including of course male, female, transgender and non binary singers. We also have many people who think they can sing well. That is allowed, one is free to do so. Both talented and less talented individuals will apply. There’s nothing wrong with that. In fact, that is often the charm of a talent show, provided that it does not result in a show in which people are ridiculed. That is hurtful and certainly not necessary. As we have seen before, ridiculing candidates could be chasing them for a very long time, in a very negative way (think of psychological complaints, insecurity, fears, in relationships, etc.). We certainly do not want that !!!! By applying the new element, anonymity, that will be almost impossible. More on this, anonymity, later.
** A significant element throughout the show will be: interviews with people talking about how much impact bullying has (had) on their lives. This will be [partly] anonymous and shall be a key element throughout the whole show.
Now there is a talent show going on that really can’t be surpassed: The Voice. A fantastic show that has conquered the whole world and from which many (international) stars have emerged.
It would be fantastic to match that success, but if you only achieve part of that success, you have already done very well. Provided, of course, that you have tried everything to also achieve that great success The Voice has (had).
1.2 The innovative element: Anonymity.
The strength of the concept is that you, initially, participate anonymously and can remain completely anonymous, if you are not through to the next rounds (of course the details of the participants are known to the employees working behind the scenes).
NB: the anonymity can even be maintained up to and including the final round. That is also an option. More on that later too.
In “The Voice” a candidate is only anonymous to the jury. In Led us sing, the candidate is anonymous to everyone. So it is really only about the voice and not about presence or youth. And that is a significant difference.
p2. The concept:
Participants can participate anonymously. How? As the title Led us sing indicates a bit, a participant will perform a song, (partly) in LED clothing.* Also, the décor will be dark with only parts in LED lighting.* This means that a participant cannot be recognized during the interpretation of the song.** If a candidate is not through, one can leave completely anonymously and no one will know who has been that candidate.
Knowing that this is the prospect, will convince many a (future) artist to participate. As a result of this, a candidate can also participate more often because nobody knows that this candidate has participated before/more often.
* = it is possible that there are other options to allow the candidate to participate anonymously. This is, of course, still open for discussion. Personally, I am not in favor of wearing masks. I don’t think that’s innovative enough.
** = remaining anonymous in round 1 really is a must. There is no debate possible about that. Otherwise, the whole concept has no meaning (and participants can still fall prey to all the things we want to avoid).
2.1 The jury:
The jury will consist of 3 individuals who judge separately. There are 3 choices to make, namely:
- Red = no thanks/no, not yet.
- Green = sing for me
- Pink = shine for me
It is the intention that every board/sign of the jury starts with red. If a juror is not charmed by the interpretation of the song (or the interpretation of the performance), then the choice remains on red. If the jury is charmed by the performance / singing, the choice can be changed. Green then means that you are through. Pink, however, means that the performance/singing was so good that the artist can do a roundskip.
Please note: this only happens if all jury members are unanimous and therefore all have chosen pink.
If a jury member chooses to make a choice other than red, it is not immediately known whether it is green or pink but then a green check mark/loop will appear high behind the judge so performer is aware that she/he /one is through to the next round or perhaps may therefore skip a round.
Please note; With pink, the anonymity could also immediately be lifted. At least; in one of the design forms.
• What is wise: letting each juror form their own team? Or let each candidate participate individually until her/his/ones exit? Of course, the entire process will be under professional supervision. Teams by/of judges is also such a calibrated (corny) pattern people already know. But it remains an option.
* The workflow of the jury must be regular. So, a juror must not/can not sit on that chair for 4 years, or more, in a row. With a good (jury)flow you keep a fresh look of the jury in it.
2.2 Theme nights
From a certain, determined round, you can opt for Theme nights. This means that a certain style of music must be performed that round. Think of: Soul, rock, R&B, hip-hop, alternative, pop, ballads, native language, Latin, country, etcetera.
* Option: In the event of a battle, the participants can choose for the other which song the other will interpret.
p3. Other option for set up show:
What is also an option is that all candidates remain anonymous for the entire show. And only with, say, 20* candidates left, each show a group photo is shown of those remaining candidates. And every time a candidate drops out, the group photo remains intact and the viewers/fans can “speculate” which candidate has, unwillingly, left the show. The viewer can therefore -in fact- participate interactively. This can be done via the website or just at home (among themselves, with family / friends), several options are open.
* With 20 candidates, several will have to leave per each show.
* There may also be fewer candidates left for the final.
* Interactive participation can be linked to winning (small) prizes.
There are also two options after this; either a week after the loss of a candidate, it is announced who has been terminated. Or it will only be announced during the final show. Then, during the final show, the photos of the candidates that did not make it to the last show, will disappear in order of termination. This is very entertaining for the viewers. Especially if they have participated interactively to unravel which artists did not make it to the final show. All this ensures that there is a lot of mystery surrounding the show, something that can only benefit the show. In addition, a wonderful tension is built up that leads to a climax.
* From a certain, determined round until the final round, candidates can choose to show themselves and thus make their identity known. This could be because they have sung well in previous shows and now want to take advantage of that (for example, by paid performances), which is totally understandable.
3.1 Performance:
In every show (from a certain round?) it is desirable that a known artist will perform. Just one song. As an extra element. It can also be a different kind of performance, for example; a dance group. This also gives the production and the candidates time to adjust something or to change clothes.
* Jurors are not going to perform themselves.
3.2 Sign up:
“How can people sign up to participate?”
The answer to that question is still open. Personally, I would think of registering via the website (that has yet to be created) and via an app (which also needs to be created). But other options are always negotiable. One can then (anonymously?) upload/record a video/clip in which one can show the singing skills.
* It should also be possible to register anonymously via the website. For example; via a unique code people get upon registration. Only the team reviewing the uploaded clips will get to know the participant’s face / identity.
3.3 Independence:
Candidates do not sign a stranglehold contract in which they have to work with certain, designated people. They decide for themselves who they want to work with. In this they are and remain totally free. The only contract that must be signed is that they observe confidentiality regarding the expiry of participation. Not only from their own participation, but also regarding the participation from the other candidates. Of course, we don’t want all the tension to be gone before the final (show) is broadcasted.
p4. What can the winner actually win?
The winner does not sign a contract through the program but of course cannot leave the program without a prize. Perhaps winning a cash prize is an option because winning a cash prize is always attractive.
4.1 Age:
Normally I do not like age limits at all but if I’m being completely honest, I really have to acknowledge that no one has the need for a singer over forty who has never been in the showbusiness before and now still wants to make a career in it. Normally I applaud that, because who are we to determine that someone else is too old to achieve anything in a certain professional field. But for this show I would still like to use a lower- and upper age limit. In my opinion, from 18 to 40 years is a nice limit. On the other hand, age shouldn’t matter because the artist remains a “Free agent” so anyone who wants to work with that artist has a free hand in that. Nevertheless, I argue for a limit in age (but is negotiable). The lower limit of 18 years is, in my opinion, necessary to protect children under that age from all kinds of things. Because a lot (of opinions) can confront you and not all opinions are enjoyable.
* Of course it is possible to produce an edition for children from … up to 18 year, as other shows also do. That is one of the possibilities. There are also enough (show)possibilities for artists over 40. Everything is negotiable.
4.2 Integrity:
As everyone has now become clear (unfortunately), it is crucial that everyone who cooperates in the show, whether as a candidate or as an employee or in any capacity whatsoever, must have the utmost integrity. Of course we have as big examples (how not to do it) The Voice (of Holland) and also in other areas (like sports). Although of course you can not indict an entire show or an entire sportsclub if there is one person or several people that cross the line without everyone in the organization being aware of this. That would not be fair. However, we do want to prevent that so that you can at least avert all appearances (of prior knowledge) of integrity violation. That is why it is in everyone’s interest that as much as possible is separated; changing rooms, toilets, showers, etc. Again, this will not stop or prevent all forms of impairment of integrity, but you should at least try to do so in every conceivable way. In addition, many female security guards must be present under the guidance of an authoritarian person. Unfortunately, we have reached a stage where this is necessary, where it should not be.
4.3 Subject to change:
Many of the aspects mentioned are “subject to change”, which means that there is always room for suggestions, adaption or improvement. Everyone should be open to that. Me too. For example, the title: Led us sing. It is not said that that title is also fixed. Led me sing could also be the title. Or a totally different text/title. Of course, it also depends on the design of how to guarantee anonymity. For example; Led, the name says it all, will only fit well in the title if the setup is linked to LED lighting to ensure anonymity for participants.
But: The core of the show is and remains: Being able to participate anonymously and to leave anonymously.
Of course, as the inventor/creator of this show, I want to have a vote/voice in every decision that has to be made.
p5. The Chair (conceptual):
Author/creator: Edwin Wong Si Kwie.