“Survivor” was a phenomenon for a few seasons, and “The Bachelor” certainly generated its share of tabloid buzz during its early years. But in terms of longevity, dominance and universal appeal, nothing matches Fox’s “American Idol.” Media people generally agree that the show, which started out as a summer fill-in and now dominates the spring in a way no other show on broadcast is capable of, is the most successful unscripted series ever. It enters its seventh season tonight as the top-ranked show among adults 18-49 for four straight seasons, a record. Though ratings slipped near the end of last season, it was still a good 10 million total viewers ahead of the competition. And even the show’s cast, host Ryan Seacrest and judges Paula Abdul, Simon Cowell and Randy Jackson, have all landed side deals on other networks, with Seacrest hosting on E! and the others producing or starring in reality series on Bravo, NBC and MTV. Shari Anne Brill, senior vice president and director of programming at Carat USA, talks to Media Life about the reasons behind “Idol’s” continued appeal, how many viewers will tune in tonight, and why people love to hate Simon Cowell.
 
 
Is "Idol" the most successful reality series in history?
 
I would say to date. The marketing and the merchandising, along with the number of viewers it brings in every week--the concert tours--the whole marketing machine, is unbelievable. There’s nothing that approaches it to date.

But I don’t want to call it reality. It’s a singing competition series. It’s not real. But the day Simon leaves is the day it falls apart. His snarkiness, his grumpiness, his interplay with Paula.
 
When you’re cranky with a British accent, it just gives you this air of authority. We love being insulted by Brits. Remember “The Weakest Link?”
 
And Randy has the catch phrases going.

Will the writers' strike have any impact on the audience for "American Idol" -- will it grow bigger or smaller because of it?

It’ll be about the same. The viewers who watch it watch it regardless. It’s the top-ranked show anyway, and the viewers who haven’t found it in the years it’s been around, I don’t think they’ll suddenly make a discovery.
 

"Idol" ratings cooled down at the end of last season. What do you attribute that to?
 
I think some of it is attributable to the extent of time devoted on the singer mentors, who I don’t think were all that compelling to the audience.

A good part of the audience is under 35, and many of the artists were artists who were big with baby boomers. I think even Diana Ross surfaced.
 

Do you expect ratings to be at about the same level this year as last?
 
Yes. And also I think a driver of why ratings slid a little toward the end of last year is that the singers just weren’t that exciting.

What will keep interest strong is the fact that the Idols who have gone on to be successful weren’t always the winners. So it’s not always who wins, but the surprise upsets when you get to the end, say the top five. Like Jennifer Hudson, Daughtry—look at their careers.
 
And people love those auditions. I think maybe, depending on what competes with it, maybe there will be a little more tune-in for auditions. But those who tune in week after week should stay about the same.

The audition rounds often get the most viewership. In ‘07, the debut grabbed 36 million viewers. So I would be shocked if this year’s didn’t top 30 million.
 

How do you explain the nearly universal appeal of this show?
 
There’s something for everyone, the opportunity to participate in voting for the next big singer, having a stake in it. You’ve got the opportunity to choose.

But to me there’s so much fun in hearing the snarky remarks and seeing the god-awful people. The William Hungs and Sanjayas give the show life, believe it or not.
 

Is it possible to counter-program against “Idol?” What types of shows do best opposite it?
 
Shows that have more masculine appeal or older appeal might do well. “The Unit,” for example, and “NCIS,” have done nicely opposite “Idol.”
 

What sort of reaction have you seen to the product placement on "Idol?" It's certainly noticeable. Is it effective? How key has "Idol" been to growing product placement usage in television?
 
I don’t know.

I think there’s a lot of awareness for the Ford Focus, but did it sell more cars? I don’t know.

In the Coca-Cola room, it’s blatant and in your face. I don’t think it bothers people, but does it build awareness? I think there’s already close to 100 percent awareness of Coke, so I’m not sure.
 
I can’t say they’ve had a hand in growing it, but they do use it quite a bit. So does “The Biggest Loser,” “The Apprentice” and virtually other reality-type show. Viewers are used to it. Whether or no they like it is a different story. But they know when something works into the fabric of the show, consumers are more intelligent than we give them credit for.
 

If you had to rate it, which season of "Idol" do you think was the best, excitement and competition-wise?
 
Oh man, maybe the year before last? You had Elliott Yamin, and Daughtry, and I think Taylor Hicks won. And the year that Fantasia and Jennifer Hudson were on. I loved her, I wanted her to win.


The show has launched the careers of two bona fide stars, Kelly Clarkson and Carrie Underwood, but other "Idol" winners and finalists haven't been as successful. Ruben Studdard and Taylor Hicks, for example, were recently dropped by their labels, and Jordin Sparks' debut hasn't sold too well. Why that disconnect between album sales and their popularity on the show?
 
[Season six winner Sparks] is a straight-up R& B person, and maybe she hasn’t really found a niche yet. She has a really great voice, but I don’t know if she knows quite who she is yet. I guess for the others they just didn’t really know how to market them, but it’s hard to say.
 
But Kelly Clarkson I think has been by far the most successful one, and that was the year “Idol” was just a little show in the summer.