I know this is going back to last year's American Idol, but in a recent radio interview, runner-up Blake Lewis blasted Sanjaya Malakar, saying the singer more famous for his hair than his voice should have never been on the show. In fact, he went on to say, "He had already gotten cut. [The judges were] like, 'You suck. You shouldn't be on the show. Then the producer [Nigel Lythgoe] put him back on." In fact, Lewis said he only made it to Hollywood because his sister did; Shyamali Malakar got cut there. If this is true, does this speak to the integrity of the selection process? I realize it's a reality show as well as a competition so personalities are cast as well as talent, but wouldn't you still want the best singers represented? I guess not.

Every year there is criticism when certain contestants advance ahead of others, but as far as I can tell this is the first time a former contestant has come out and said much the same. "I got pissed every week because my buddies that are super-talented are going home and he's [still there]," he said about Sanjaya's improbable run to seventh place. Of course, once they hit the stage it's our choice, and our fault, how long they stay. But are the showrunners intentionally putting in sub-par performers to try and drum up press and controversy like they had last year with Sanjaya?