"Produce X 101" Releases Official Explanation Regarding Controversy Over Vote Counts
An official statement has been released to explain the controversy over vote counts for the “Produce X 101” finale.
On July 24, “Produce X 101” shared the following statement via social media:
This is an announcement regarding the controversy over the gaps in total votes for the “Produce X 101” live show.
First of all, as the production staff in charge, we express sincere apologies for causing controversy over the “Produce X 101” text votes.
During the [July] 19 live show, “Produce X 101” revealed the total numbers of individual votes based on combined online pre-votes and live text votes when announcing each of the 11 members who will debut.
Following the broadcast, the “Produce X 101” production staff recognized that the gaps in votes between some of the trainees are identical. After checking, we discovered that although there are no issues with the total ranking, there were errors in the process of calculating and relaying the total numbers of individual votes.
This is an explanation regarding the identical gaps in votes between the trainees.
The “Produce X 101” staff in charge of calculating the votes during the live show validated the rankings via multiple methods by recording the rankings based on vote counts and also calculating based on the percentage of each trainee’s votes. However, in the process of validating the rankings, this staff rounded the vote percentages up to two decimal places, and the vote counts that were converted from the vote percentages were relayed to the live show.
We once again confirm that there were no changes in the rankings in this process.
We once again apologize to all of the national producers who supported and voted for “Produce X 101” and also to the trainees and related parties.
We will improve our text voting system and calculation system to prevent this problem from occurring again the future.
Our production staff will put in our full effort to produce more transparent and fair programs in the future.
Source (1)
Comments