For two years in a row, American Idol -- the televised talent show whose latest season concluded Wednesday night -- has managed to bring young Americans to its "polls," week after week, to vote for their favorite would-be pop stars. Meanwhile, the same young people who have so regularly and enthusiastically cast millions of American Idol ballots are, by and large, unlikely to vote in real elections. While 18-to-24-year-olds are a potentially significant voting bloc (numbering around 25 million), only 32 percent voted in the 2000 presidential election. Everyone has theories about why so many young people don't vote and how to lure them to the polls. But maybe it's time to ask what American politics can learn from American Idol -- and to give credit to the show's creators for their marked success in convincing young people that a vote for something, even if it is only a pop star, can matter at all.
It is often said that young Americans don't vote because they believe a single vote cannot make a difference. But if the Florida election debacle didn't convince them otherwise, the most recent season of American Idol should. When Ruben Studdard, who ultimately won the competition, was nearly voted off the show a few weeks ago, his fans got the message; the number of votes he received -- as well as the total number of votes cast -- increased in subsequent episodes. Wednesday night's final showdown between Studdard and Alfred E. Newman look-alike Clay Aiken was itself nearly too close to call. With 24 million votes cast, just one-half of 1 percent separated the two contestants. Studdard's supporters no doubt understand that just a few of them made the difference between their idol's victory and defeat.
Another popular theory holds that young Americans are turned off by the negative tone of political campaigns. But American Idol proves that it's the quality of the negativity, not the negativity itself, that matters. In fact, negativity was one of the show's main selling points -- as judge Simon Cowell's comments became more caustic, the program's audience grew larger -- but the show largely stuck to substantive negativity rather than opting for mere nastiness. That substantive negativity may have been somewhat overshadowed by Cowell's biting tone and fellow judge Paula Abdul's vapid comments, but the show contained an ample amount of real criticism that helped the contestants improve each week -- and encouraged viewers to vote off the performers who couldn't measure up. Think how much better off the American democratic process would be if the media offered candidates honest, hard-hitting criticism rather than focusing on superficial issues, such as candidates' personal relationships, the color of their shirts or how much they pay for haircuts. Too often the candidates themselves seem eager to play along with this distracting game. But if the media forced candidates to take real positions on issues and articulate proposals, young voters might feel more enthusiastic about choosing among them.
Others have theorized that young Americans don't cast ballots because voting technology is inconvenient and inaccessible. American Idol suggests one way to rectify these problems: The show makes voting easy by enabling viewers to cast ballots by phone from the comfort of their homes. During this, its second season, the producers even made it possible for viewers to vote through "text messaging" -- a clear attempt to reach out to the show's younger demographic.
There has been no lack of discussion in recent years about the importance of updating voting technology. But myriad excuses -- from the cost to bureaucratic inertia to the conservative fear that technology upgrades will work to the advantage of Democrats more than Republicans -- have stymied progress. While Congress need not go so far as permitting text-messaging votes, it ought to recognize that updated and more accessible voting technology could help attract younger voters (not to mention sharply reduce the chances of another butterfly ballot fiasco).
Finally, American Idol self-consciously marketed itself to young Americans, and political candidates need to begin doing the same. This doesn't mean presidential aspirants have to speak on glitzy stages, put blond highlights in their hair or employ navel-baring campaign workers. But it does mean they need to address issues that are important to young Americans, such as reducing student debt, making home ownership more accessible and promoting tax policies that will benefit those just entering the workforce.
The first two seasons of American Idol have no doubt convinced some young Americans that their votes can have a real effect on electoral outcomes. Now politicians need to realize that the voters of the American Idol generation are worth serenading.
Martha Paskoff is special assistant to the president at The Century Foundation.
