Last year, when Eric Dittelman appeared on AMERICA'S GOT TALENT, someone here pointed out that performers on the show are prohibited from working with volunteers from the audience- for legal reasons.

Does anyone know the rationale behind this? Is NBC afraid someone's head might explode a la SCANNERS?

I think it's because normally you have to sign a disclaimer/permission to use your any images they record of you. If they don't have the signed permission they can't air it so that rules out being able to pick a person at random.

The judges however have signed the release and I assume the contestants do too - I know judges are often used but I can't see anything that prevents you using another contestant or the compere/presenter/guest star if the night etc. (Except the risk of a rival contestant intentionally trying to stitch you up)

S&F
James

In Britain's Got Talent, audience members have been used. I assume they give permission and sign a waiver afterwards as James said for publication/broadcast rights. The auditions are often edited so it may be that this was done just before the performance, alternatively well before filming with two people being pre-selected.

I performed on a UK TV talent show and during the rehearsals the stage manager asked if I could use someone who was left handed as the camera positioning would be better. The audience took their seats and he asked for those who were left handed to raise their hand. A young lady was chosen, she was mic'd up
and was asked to remain seated till invited her up. No pre-show waiver, disclaimer etc.

The deal is no one is allowed to talk about it after performing on the show. The contract never expires.

But I think its safe to say from a spectator standpoint, the show is a talent show with (now) 4 judges. The audience is there to watch, not participate.

But they show images of audience members reacting all the time: Laughing, scowling, chanting "Vegas! Vegas!" and, in the case of Special Head last week, even blurting out a profanity.

There was audience interaction on NBC's PHENOMENON so I don't understand why AGT would be any different.

imo a performance looks stronger with an audience member. If the judges/host are always used, people may be more likely to suspect collusion.

It doesn't work like that. My main business is film production (not big films just commercial videos like training/product launch stuff) and the standard in the UK is that short clips of a few seconds are fine with no need for permission but ANY thing of more than a few seconds a written permission was required. The blanket waiver was a sign on a venue saying 'Today's performance/recital etc will be recorded, if you do not wish your image to be used in the film please let one of the crew know.' That way we could film crowd reaction shots at concerts without needing individual permission. However once you go beyond the 'fair use' of a few seconds it becomes a different ball game.

The reason I'm saying this is so that the original poster is prepared for the fact that waivers are required (in most instances) so they don't build their act only to go to the performance to find they can't use a member of the audience.

That's not to say you cannot use an audience member - just be sure to let the even organiser know you require to use one and they will sort out the tv waiver. The problem is anyone who knows about tv knows that such a waiver has been signed / declaration to camera beforehand, therefore the suspicion arises of stooge. All the tv shows with magicians performing street magic would have had a crew with the waivers getting them signed - it's just the way it's done and personally I'm quite glad as it allows an individual control over the manner they are represented in the final product.

S&F

James