My point is this. We artists that do the "competitions" underwrite them and most make profits from our entry fees etc. If we as a group would expose poorly ran ones for what they are pressure would be exerted on them to run them better. I have sat around with artists while we laughed about the idea of starting our own competition. We'd take turns letting each other win the title of, "world's greatest artists"...silly huh? Well it's been going on for years.
Check out
www.greenhousegallery.com and see the Salon 2002, Hundreds of entries from around the world and one of Greenhouse gallery's artists won with a 10x13" painting. In the 2001 OPA national show, the judge gave her husband one of the major awards. This happens because artists let it, ignore it and continue to fund it. Art Talk is the only art pulication that will even mention such things in print.
As a group we could change things. We lack unity as a profession. It was not always so.
I think it would be nice and is extremely rare when attending a show for the best works to win across the boards...not some good works and many weak pieces...all the awarded works to be solid.
Doesn't it seem that once in a while the "peoples choice" and "artists' choice" could be the same as the judges choices...this rarely ever happens and it's not because the judge has better taste.