Should Paul Potts have won Britain's got Talent

June 22, 2007 6:55am CST
It seems that Paul Potts was not the amateur singer that he made himself out to be. Should he take the prize or not.
1 person likes this
2 responses
@brothertuck (1257)
• United States
22 Jun 07
I don't know how it is in the Britain version, but many of the acts on America's got talent seem to be acts that perform in clubs and even regular shows in Las Vegas. If Paul was a star, known to the public for his work, then I think he should step back, but if he is less known then I think that it's ok. Part of the idea of the show is to get acts that many don't see into the public eye, so it's self promotion. Just getting on the show and into the second round is a win for many. Getting into the finals can make a small time but quality act into a bigger time act. They can put on their poster Britain or America got Talent finalist, and people will say, yeah I remember that.
22 Jun 07
Agreed...what's the prize on the American version?
@Phlamingho (7831)
• Denmark
22 Jun 07
I don't really floow that show, but I guess it depends on the rules, if you have to be an amateur in order to get in, then no, I shouldn't take the prize