The Susan Boyle ''exploitation'' started from the very first staged ''surprise'' on the judges faces after she stood there being interviewed by them about her aspirations, looking dowdy and spinsterish.  (A set up I suspect!).   She opened her mouth... and ....camera to the faces of Simon Cowell and Amanda Holden ....capture their huge ''surprise''    ---  No Oscars for this pair ... very poorly acted!

The producers had previously heard her sing at auditions, they new jolly well she had a worthy voice - they saw a chance of a great ratings bump.  See the spinster, let her come out looking a little ''brain damaged'' and when the audience, judges and public go mad put it on YouTube!!!  The judges had paper in front of them... I suspect they had all the information about her on those papers.

 This woman should be allowed to sing, her disability should not be discrminated against BUT she should have been protected right from the first moment they decided to USE her, to manipulate her performance for their own good.  It was blatantly obvious to anyone that she needed protecting from herself... and the media and exploiters of this world.

Susan has a lovely voice, but there is more to entertaining than delivering your ''craft''. Tenacity, endurance, robust ''life skills'' all help and she lacks, due to no fault of her own, the ability to think on her feet, to think ''beyond the square'' and will need help/assistance to carry on if she is able to ''reach her dream.''

Organisers/producers/judges all had a responsibility but they are so focussed on ''ratings'' that they lost the plot here - quick exploitation got results . They are running for cover now, saying they had medical experts on hand...... a token gesture for what was required in Susan Boyles case.....    to damn with advising/helping  a vulnerable, slightly mentally disabled, sheltered woman cope through what resulted in a global sensational programme. They used her disability and have now been caught out when their ''star ratings'' pawn broke down and she, not them, is now paying the price for ITV's huge, unbelievable show ratings. 

Britian's Got Talent alright but it doesn't come from those running this programme. Nothing is as it seems and surely some of the people who paraded out ''sob stories'' which  are now found to be ''slightly'' different from the truth ---- should be checked out before appearing ---- Oh no, because they are the ones who tweak the public's heart-strings (and bump up the ratings!) . Truth is called for in future shows. Let's see those with true talent and the strength to get through the shows win through. Do away with the ''set up'' selections of some ''never going to win'' contestants, chosen so those who the organisers/judges want to win get a better chance..... I venture to say there should be some credible talent from the judges in doing an honest, credible talent selection for the semis!!!!

Britain's Got Exploitation.... I rest my case.

I don't see why we should know anything about the contestants at all.  Why not just introduce them and let people judge them on their performance and not on their background/sob story.  If they are truly talented then their talent will speak for itself.  Although .. having said that popularity isn't necessarily a sign of quality.   Agadoo reached No.1 from what I recall.  No accounting for taste.

Paul, I've watched this story with interest from the US as I have an adult cousin with an apparently smilar problem to Susan Boyle's.  Hypoxia is an acquired brain injury - so Susan didn't just "look" brain damaged - she actually is.  And, that was the biggest injustice to me - to spin this story as if all it was about was looks.

Brain damage varies from person to person but there are always behavioral issues - which range from poor impulse control to inappropriate affect to lack of reasoning skills to poor problem solving skills,etc.

My cousin is near Susan's age - 45 - and, in the end, her parents also decided it was best to keep her at home.  She tried to work but found dealing with the public too much.  I think she might have thrived in a so-called "sheltered workshop" situation - but not in the workplace as I know it.  She does well with rote - ABCABCABCABC - but throw in a monkey wrench - ABD, for example, and she has a meltdown.  Unfortunately the world in which most of us live is just not that predictable - and therein lies the rub.

I am also sympathetic to Susan's family, who probably knew all of this, but also know that these individuals are quite often bright and talented - and very very hardheaded.  They are not able to see the forest for the trees - too literal at times - and they lack reasoning skills.  It is useless to try to tell such a person "Be careful what you wish for" - their impulse is to go for it.  And they are often poor at picking up on subtleties of social interaction - such as when people saying something nice just to be nice but don't literally actually mean it.

Putting such an individual on the public stage in the public eye was a recipe for disaster - no matter what she thought or wanted or the fact that she's a full grown adult.  I never imagined she would be capable of the career she dreams of - and it's heartbreaking - because she really is talented.  But life skills are also needed to make it in this world which proves time and time again that it has little space for those who are "of" it - but not quite "in" it. 

I accept Susan Boyles has a legitimate ''brain injury'' and only used the way I put it to show what the organisers would have seen when she walked through the door.

It is blatantly obvious she has intellectual difficulties (whatever they may be I am sure she and her family know) and she did have the right to be there as able bodied singers have the right but she should have had constant, caring support at all stages of the competition. The organisers exploited her and her condition and that is disgusting and totally unprofessional. In my view!

Respect for Talent

I would like to say thank you to Susan Boyle for her performance.  She is a natural, skilled, independent lady.

RESPECT FOR TALENT

The media, press and millions of people wanted Susan Boyle for who she is.  Her skills include emotions.  However, as a viewer I do not want to be involved in promoting 'negative' stimulation in the form of anxiety attacks.

CRYING FOR A CAT

The emotion was open, very honest, true to herself, beautiful and thought provoking. Susan was suffering from a LOSS of 'me time' and I understand, the comfort of her cat.

LOSS

We all suffer loss in our lives.  For example, the loss of a pet. Recently I lost my dog. The feelings were intense.  It was a journey I did not want to experience daily.

Susan lost her normal independent world.  Experienced continual emotional and physical stimulation.  Very few people can cope with this 24/7 suddenly having been catapulted into a "world" of "fame". Susan did not let the public down. Susan lived every moment, as requested, and in doing so achieved personal exhaustion. A natural reaction is for "me time" (relaxation).  I hope the clinic allowed the cat to join her.

Whilst recuperating, I am sure the professionals will help Susan work out a balance of "me time", work and world demands.

I don't disagree with you at all but underscore that "having the right" and 'being a good idea" are entirely different - and perhaps sometimes mutually exclusive!

 Because the world at large is NOT a "sheltered workshop" - this was a bad idea for her personally.

 As to whether it was a "good idea" for business/ratings, etc. for the TV producers - I don't know.  The fallout may be so negative (and she may be unable to participate in their money-making tours, etc.) that it yet proves to be a very poor judgment AND "investment".