Oprah NOT Rigging Votes Against Zach Anner [UPDATED]

Oprah did not rig a reality television show contest so that the popular favorite would lose, the San Francisco Chronicle reports.

The Chronicle says that a set of spam blogs were put together, possibly based in Marietta, GA, to "upset the normal order of search trends."

According to Geekosystem.com, users on the internet forum 4Chan are responsible for the skewed vote in Anner's favor.

Rumors started swirling Tuesday that Oprah was rigging votes against Anner, the crowd favorite to win her reality television show contest. Over the past two days, "Oprah rigs votes against Zach Anner" and "Oprah rigs contest in favor of African-American" became top Google searches.

Earlier, a contestant named Dr. Phyllis accrued more than 300,000 votes and surpassed Anner in a matter of 20 minutes, raising eyebrows across the internet (screenshot here) and angering Anner fans. Anner had previously been in the No. 1 spot for a week.

The Oprah Winfrey Network said it will investigate the controversy.

Anner is a former University of Texas student and seasoned television host. He also has cerebal palsy and calls himself a "wheelchair-bound lady magnet."

Comments

[Jordy Flash]

08:39 PM on 08/13/2010

Huff Post working as Oprah's PR, pretty standard.

[liarsclub75]

07:31 PM on 08/12/2010

This was rigged. We are not fooled!

[Another ANON]

12:46 AM on 08/12/2010

keep deleting the comments, forum mod is rigging this blog : you should silence whiteknight

[Another ANON]

12:32 AM on 08/12/2010

'RIGGED

[gda002]

03:39 PM on 07/10/2010

This is ridiculous. If anyone actually read 4chan, they would know that they specifically didn't bot the numbers in order to avoid this. Oprah rigged it.

[mastermike14]

12:45 AM on 07/10/2010

At first when i heard about Anner i thought he was popular just because he was disabled and i was totally opposed to this guy, HOWEVER after i saw his video i saw what a truly remarkable and funny guy he is. It was not until after i saw his video that i supported him 100%. I dont support him in some twisted way to make fun of him. He had the support of the internet, including 4chan. Oprahs rules allowed for voting as much as possible, since when is having a great number of people rooting for you rigging something. This was a popularity contest and Zach Anner was the most popular person. All you Oprah people and haters can suck it. You are pathetic, sad, sorry people. I will pray for you.

[mastermike14]

12:40 AM on 07/10/2010

"According to Geekosystem.com, users on the internet forum 4Chan are responsible for the skewed vote in Anner's favor."

This may be true but it is irrelevant to the vote rigging in favor of phyllis. The fact still remains that P gained 300,000 votes in 20 minutes. Saying well you started it is not an excuse and its childish.
1. Geekosystem, not Oprah, determined [specifically] that 4Chan users were responsible for Anner's apparent lead.

Again irrelevant to Oprah rigging votes for phyllis. This story was not about Anner, this story was about Phyllis. The issue surrounding Anner is a completely different story.

2. If you've ever actually USED 4chan[dot]org, then you're probably already thinking it was the community making fun of Anner for being physically challenged by voting for him as a "chick magnet" (I just saw that on ...4chan :|)

i have used it, 4chan launched a voting operation for Anner because hes physically challenged. They seriously went through all that work, just to make fun of him? 4chan and many others supported this guy because of his truly wonderful personality. I did not support this guy until after i saw his video.

Anyway, it's Oprah. Who the hell cares and why're people bent like this is the worst form of racism in American history? No one was denied entrance to school - settle down.

Oh so what you are implying is that this was racially motivated and its ok because its a contest and not a school.

[annonamouse]

10:45 PM on 07/09/2010

If anon votes for zack and they vote in huge numbers then he should win but if opera is riggin the votes like they claim then zack will not win and never stood a chance if she aint riggin the votes how did he go from 7mil to 3 mill?

[kevinevans]

09:28 PM on 07/09/2010

It was clearly rigged.
Take this as evidence:
http://myown.oprah.com/audition/index.html?promo_cat_id=&order=total#browse_top
As you can see above, Zach has the most votes (about 9 million), and Jaq has only 7.
http://myown.oprah.com/audition/index.html?request=finalists
While on this page, it dropped to 3 million; and Jaq has 9 million.

The finalists page was clearly edited to make sure that Anner doesn't make it in to finals.

[dtla1730]

04:35 PM on 07/09/2010

"According to Geekosystem.com, users on the internet forum 4Chan are responsible for the skewed vote in Anner's favor."

1. Geekosystem, not Oprah, determined [specifically] that 4Chan users were responsible for Anner's apparent lead.

2. If you've ever actually USED 4chan[dot]org, then you're probably already thinking it was the community making fun of Anner for being physically challenged by voting for him as a "chick magnet" (I just saw that on ...4chan :|)

So chances are the whole thing probably WAS unevenly weighted to begin with.

Anyway, it's Oprah. Who the hell cares and why're people bent like this is the worst form of racism in American history? No one was denied entrance to school - settle down.

[MaxGrey]

10:00 AM on 07/10/2010

So because I website you don't like has their users votes for someone that makes those vote illegitimate?

[Thomas Paladino]

05:46 PM on 06/27/2010

This article could not be more wrong. You say conclusively that 'Oprah did NOT Rig Votes', and as your evidence, you point to a google-bomb of a search term. Newsflash: Google bombing DOES NOT have anything to do with the vote rigging controversy.

The google bomb was put in place by the individuals who DISCOVERED very real voting irregularities in the contest, as a means to drive the search term up in popularity and gain some actual coverage of it.

You people had better get used to the new reality of journalism, which is that this technique will be used quite often in the future by people with no PR apparatus or media connections in order to draw attention to stories that they feel deserve it. It is then up to YOU as journalists to independently determine if the stories have merit. You did nothing of the sort here, you just cluelessly regurgitated something which you obviously have no understanding of. This article needs to be rewritten.

[WebPillar]

07:20 PM on 06/27/2010

I agree completely. You said exactly what I was attempting to say, very succinctly. I can't believe this was published.

[WebPillar]

01:59 PM on 06/27/2010

Your headline is so incredibly misleading it is incredible. In fact, it's more simply untrue, rather than misleading. This piece needs to be revised. It purports that the "spam blogs" mentioned by the SF Chronicle were used to bump Anner's votes. The spam blogs were apparently (your source is terrible also, so I am unsure how much to believe about the spam blogs) bumping the search term about Oprah rigging votes against Zach, NOT Zach's standing in the contest. That is not clear at all in your writing. Spam blogs could be the cause of the rise of that search term, the accuracy of which is unknown (but possible). The spam blogs have nothing to do with Zach's votes (some of which were probably rigged, many of which were not rigged).

[WebPillar]

01:53 PM on 06/27/2010

This is an incredibly poor piece. First of all, the source that you cited does not even talk about whether or not Oprah was rigging votes against Zach (except to say that to believe this would be racist). The San Francisco Chronicle page gives no proof that Oprah has not rigged votes against Zach. http://www.geekosystem.com/zach-anner-rigged-votes-oprah/ gives evidence that SOMEONE has had set it up so that every vote Zach got, Dr. Phylis got two. Oprah is a logical guess, believe it or not. Her people obviously have the easiest access to the voting code. However, that is not to say that it may have been someone else. The San Francisco Chronicle guy clearly has NO idea what is going on. Though it is absolutely hilarious to see him call everyone racist.

Now, of course some of Zach's votes were also rigged, 4chan being involved and all. But it was nowhere near as mechanically efficient as Dr. Phylis's rigging. Not to mention that there is a LOT of genuine support for Zach, between both 4chan and Reddit.

Even the way the SF Chronicle article talks about 4chan being "used" to rig votes for Zach is wrong. What? How does one use 4chan to rig votes? Yes, 4channers did rig votes, and did spread the word there, but the site itself can't rig votes.
I continue to support Zach as a comedian. I hope that the investigation will be objective and fair.

[hypnotoad72]

09:01 AM on 06/27/2010

I know television in general is not the most intellectual of mediums, but a "reality show" is even more intellectually-vapid than a "talk show". I never thought that would be possible, but somebody came up with the "reality show", so there you go...

I had no idea Oprah was involved in a reality show. Or why she should be accused of manipulation.

[samoisdead]

12:27 AM on 06/27/2010

Okay, I've read the article, now let me read through the onslaught of both overtly and outwardly racist posts.

[Impureclient]

10:57 PM on 08/02/2010

I think it's clear who the racist one is here, chief.