MSE News: Most popular X Factor act revealed (& how to vote for free)

savercol

Picking up on a few points here, in no particular order.
1. If FREE2CALL start giving out the result of each artists vote will X Factor not shut them down or refuse their transfered calls?
2. Sir Martin said it is a news worthy event. Maybe a "water cooler event" but not news worthy. Only The Star has it daily as a major gossip event. Even Sky cover wars, deaths and tragedies before Jedward.
3. I'm adicted. Up until this year I could take or leave it but the family sit around the TV and scream or laugh at the acts. Voted for all acts except Jedward but hope they stay in just for the fun.

£&*£(£)*

fiscalfreckles wrote: »

Looking at this list, although the bottom two are correct, I would question whether this vote count (from Free2call free votes cast) accurately reflects the broader picture.

Think that this list reflects a certain demographic of older voters (perhaps all MSEs?!) as Danyl & Olly do so well, whereas if you polled 10,000 teenagers I am certain that Stacey, Joe & LLoyd would be higher.

Exactly!

I've seen younger people sit there and vote multiple times. It's not uncommon to hear of ten votes a time or more. Younger acts get the types of people that multi vote. Also the likes of Lloyd fans are less likely to even know about this free voting, or even care about it when they can vote multiple times from their mobile.

So no MSE, you're not exclusively revealing the most popular X Factor contestant this week. You're revealing who voted via a free vote system. But hey, you're trying to be popularist, I know...

£&*£(£)*

Also I have to take issue with:

Martin Lewis, MoneySavingExpert.com creator, says: "These votes are like a giant survey, except they're of people who take the time to pick up the phone and vote so are likely to be more accurate. "The sample size is far greater than normal opinion polls, which often rely on 2,000, so is likely to be close to the actual result.

While a larger sample size may provide a slightly more accurate result, it will be marginal. Sample sizes that go over 1000 - 1500 provide negligble accuracy increases the higher it goes.

In fact going from 2000 to 10000 takes the margin of error from 2.2% to 1% (using a statistical models used in surveying). Add to that the sample set for this survey is not representative, and not known to the general public watching the show and doesn't allow the multiple voting that takes place, it's very dodgy indeed.

But hey, it is just a TV show...

kindofagilr

This doesnt give a true reflection of the voting numbers, all it gives is a top ten of people who vote for free.

I doubt the votes would be the same if the people were paying for them

randomtask_2

There would be more integrity about the outcome of this 'poll' if the sample participating were representative of the full picture. In this case, the very wide demographic reach of The X Factor voting population is unlikely to be fully and robustly replicated via the results presented on the article, which as others point out, reflects the 'free voting' minority frequenting places like MSE.

rizla01

Like it or not, 'X Factor' gets a LOT of viewers each week.

Simon Cowell must be very rich.

Needs to be to be able to afford to pay the other channels to put on such rubbish during the same timeslot.

Er, just my opinion.:)

The lovely lass from Wales aught to win. AND, what is WRONG with the Dagenham bird?

Rylynn

Okay here are my thoughts, and Martin thank you for your input here and putting the results up on your site.

Can I just say this was NOT only advertised here, it was given out on Sky News and I believe on Sky News website as well, and one newspaper had the story but not sure which one. So for me anyone could have known about this free2call service. I would like to know the figures for Week 1 and 2, and week 3 there were no free votes I read, as they had no sponser, ie advertiser. No disrespect meant but I think Sky News does reach a very wide audience and not people who just visit sites such as this, and the newsletter here goes out to how many people, an awful lot, and who is to say that parents did not tell their kids, hey you can vote for free as I just read about it in Martins newsletter!

I did use the system, I was highly sceptical to begin with, one was my vote going to actually get there and two would it be counted, three when I get my bill will I have been charged some daft amount of money. So to get the results as put all of those fears to bed! Will just have to be quicker this week in using the system, unless it now goes into melt down!

I can also tell you why I chose to use the service, I banned premium numbers and mobile numbers from my phone when my dear son ran me up a huge bill. So I cannot vote on this show, and I wanted to, and I have no idea if others abused it but I voted just ONCE and for ONE person only, as I figure I just got to vote for free and other people should have the same right. I hope that now this is out the teenagers will not sit over there multiple voting, and it is a shame that it cannot be that you can only vote ONCE end of story but then that is my opinion.

To have people multiple voting also ruins it for the advertisers? they want to reach as many people as possible, not one girl voting 2000 times, surely defeats any object of the project.

I know Martin has mentioned on the news story that it may not reflect the youngsters voting, but there you see I disagree, not being rude Martin, had it not had Lloyd as bottom 2 I would agree, but it does have him there and HE was bottom 2, so for me surely it is a very good reflection on how the nation voted on this show over the weekend.

For those who do not think this is news, fair enough maybe not to you, but to other people it may not be the biggest story, but it is light entertainment that over 14.5m people seem to watch and are very interested to see how 10,000 people voted.

Now I said I used it for the reason my phone wont allow me to vote, had I not used it I would have used my sons mobile and voted, so one way or another I would have voted anyway, so do not agree this is only people wanting something for free. It is not free for people using it from a mobile anyway, just cheaper.

So thank you again Martin and I agree totally with your post quoted below, news for me is not all about wars, it is nice to read some light hearted stuff about a show so many people watch.. and oh Danyl to win for me, and I love the twins I think they are hilarious, and without them the show would be boring... thank you for reading, all thoughts welcome.:beer:

MSE Martin Of course its news - lots of people are interested - and these are unique figures not published before about a cultural issue that 14m people watch - and a huge number spend 35p a time on. You'll see X-factor covered in every broadsheet and on TV and radio news constantly

News and all work is about shades of light and dark and this helps the mix. Looking at our last five stories X-factor, Iphone price, pension credit, air fares, and current accounts that's nice balance to me.
Martin

£&*£(£)*

Rylynn wrote: »

Can I just say this was NOT only advertised here, it was given out on Sky News and I believe on Sky News website as well, and one newspaper had the story but not sure which one. So for me anyone could have known about this free2call service.

Anyone COULD know. Yes. But they won't. I'm sorry, take a 15 year old girl. Talking generically she wouldn't read Sky news, she wouldn't read Money Saving Expert.

Any system that is not on the show itself will NOT be accurate.

I don't begrudge MSE showing the results of the free poll. It may give an indication, or be a bit of a fun... as long as it's not portrayed as an actual result.

Finally, are previous weeks' results available? If multiple weeks match up, I'll give it more credit. One week isn't enough. I suspect (no basis for this) that they'll release the results when it agrees with the bottom two of the show.

Rylynn

hostile17 wrote: »

Anyone COULD know. Yes. But they won't. I'm sorry, take a 15 year old girl. Talking generically she wouldn't read Sky news, she wouldn't read Money Saving Expert.

Any system that is not on the show itself will NOT be accurate.

I don't begrudge MSE showing the results of the free poll. It may give an indication, or be a bit of a fun... as long as it's not portrayed as an actual result.

Finally, are previous weeks' results available? If multiple weeks match up, I'll give it more credit. One week isn't enough. I suspect (no basis for this) that they'll release the results when it agrees with the bottom two of the show.

There was no voting week three on freetocall, and I have enquired about the results for week one and week two, hopefully they will give them out, and oddly Martin has said somewhere they hope to have the results every week not just the week that the bottom two are the same on the show as are voted on free2call and there is no reason to believe that is the only reason they have given them out.

A guy good with statistics I spoke with says that anything over 2000 people is seen as being more accurate than any amount under it, so if this site as reported may have 20 or 30k free this week that will be an even bigger indicator of some accuracy, no one is saying it is 100 per cent right. So the 15 year olds do not know about it, then you would expect Joe, Lucie and Lloyd to be bottom not Rachel, who was mainly an older persons vote I think. If you think about it, this free voting system had Lloyd in the bottom 2, but the shock is so did the whole vote on Sunday night, so the 15 year olds were not voting on this system okay, but they were not voting on the normal systems either in any huge amounts or he would not have been there, so for me it is reflection of the countries voting, but maybe I am being naive. I think it very interesting and I will try to use it again, but as I said I only place one vote for one person, no multiple rubbish, or more than one person, as for me spliting votes is a dangerous game if you actually have a favourite to win.

GG

quoia

Rylynn wrote: »

There was no voting week three on freetocall, and I have enquired about the results for week one and week two, hopefully they will give them out, and oddly Martin has said somewhere they hope to have the results every week not just the week that the bottom two are the same on the show as are voted on free2call and there is no reason to believe that is the only reason they have given them out.

A guy good with statistics I spoke with says that anything over 2000 people is seen as being more accurate than any amount under it, so if this site as reported may have 20 or 30k free this week that will be an even bigger indicator of some accuracy, no one is saying it is 100 per cent right. So the 15 year olds do not know about it, then you would expect Joe, Lucie and Lloyd to be bottom not Rachel, who was mainly an older persons vote I think. If you think about it, this free voting system had Lloyd in the bottom 2, but the shock is so did the whole vote on Sunday night, so the 15 year olds were not voting on this system okay, but they were not voting on the normal systems either in any huge amounts or he would not have been there, so for me it is reflection of the countries voting, but maybe I am being naive. I think it very interesting and I will try to use it again, but as I said I only place one vote for one person, no multiple rubbish, or more than one person, as for me spliting votes is a dangerous game if you actually have a favourite to win.

GG

I AGREE. And for a variety of reasons.

Firstly you have to take it that these results are indeed factual and not just a dodgy bunch of numbers pulled out of thin air with the bottom 2 positioned so as to reflect the outcome of the programme.

Having said that .... then secondly this was not a poll in the sense of being stopped in the street and asked a question or two, but the ACTUAL "bums on seats" outcome of a telephone service being used.
The "stopped in the street" poll can be skewed by the question itself and the manner or circumstance in which it is asked.
Furthermore those being asked and providing the answers may only do so in this "interview" circumstance, and supply a response despite NOT really having an opinion, or at least not one that they would have acted upon and therefore actually voted, which as it happens, EVEN applies to many that DO have a significant opinion on the subject.
The previous posts commenting about inaccuracy, sample sizes etc. are not as applicable in this instance regarding the standard deviation of the results obtained.

Similarly multiple voting by one person doesn't really affect the F2C results, whether these are split across several acts or all just for one act.
A few dozen people doing this is relatively insignificant, and they are just as likely to cancel each other out (unless some have previously conspired to work together to attempt some betting scam or just annoy Simon cowell.)
Anyway this multiple voting readily occurs without the existance of F2C, and I would suggest, is most prevalent amongst those that (it is claimed) would NOT know about and therefore could NOT use the F2C system, namely teenagers with what they consider to be an endless and almost immaterial amount of credit on their mobile phone and the apparent inconsequential cost of texts & calls etc.

The further the demographics of the two "voting systems" are pushed apart the more likely that the overall opinions in each must be the same if both give the same result.
If the ONLY people to know about using the FREE2CALL route were retired one-legged Mongolian Yak farmers that owned a parrot called Boris, and their F2C votes put Lloyd 8th & Rachel 9th, as did the general British public using the "premium rate" method, then either a "million to one" chance/coincidence occurred or they voted very very similarly and perhaps for the same reasons.

So the argument that almost NO 15 year-old girls used F2C and that they all voted by the "advertised" procedure obviously didn't make any difference whatsoever for Lloyd & Rachel.
So this "lack" of votes via F2C left Lloyd & Rachel bottom according to their calculations, whereas in "real life" tens of 1000's of "normal" votes from females aged 15 STILL left Lloyd & Rachel at the rear.
And according to the "experts" this is exactly the audience that particularly Lloyd would appeal to and will be voting in their masses for him.

So the REVERSE argument (well it's the same ...sort of .. but.. well you'll see..) that ONLY more mature sensible penny-pinching MSE types (those aware of F2C) would be the vast majority making use of this service, would surely have produced a different set of F2C results to those published, and would NOT have mirrored "real life".
This is obviously still based on Rachel & Lloyd because that is the only data from the show itself. Rachel & Lloyd had the least votes cast of the nine contestants, Rachel was worst of the pair.
Given the more mature sensible adults' (using F2C) opinions how did the terrible twins come 2nd ? How come they were not in the bottom two ?
Almost everything I've read would suggest this MSE type older demographic would have booted this talentless pair off the show every week since the start given the chance.
I'd have thought if the F2C route was being "swamped" by this designated (differently opinionated) few, then the published results would have reflected this.

So either the demographics were very similar which resulted in a very similar if not identical outcome, or the 2 groups of voters were very different BUT had the same viewpoint.