A recent update from the White Media General Manager revealed a shift in the New Star Factory judging lineup. Yulia Sumacheva indicated that comedian Garik Martirosyan will step away from his duties on the judging panel. The move appears to be aimed at ensuring impartiality as the program progresses, with the decision described as temporary and precautionary rather than permanent. Martirosyan confirmed the pause, explaining that his absence would allow the show to proceed without perceived bias, and he hinted at bringing gifts upon his return. His closing remarks to the young contestants encouraged collaboration over rivalry and underscored a growth mindset: there is value in competing with one’s own past performance rather than measuring oneself against others.
In late March, additional discourse emerged from the show, noting a moment when Martirosyan mildly critiqued the performance of a participant’s niece. The contestant, Nonna Yeganyan, had performed a song alongside a guest rapper during a segment of the program. The moment highlighted the tension that can arise between critique and audience connection on a live stage. Yeganyan’s charisma and vocal presence were widely acknowledged by some colleagues, yet Martirosyan offered a different assessment, emphasizing that he did not regard the moment as a dismissal or firing but rather a reminder of the complex balance between feedback and encouragement. He also expressed appreciation for another participant, Alexander Krug, who is known for his ties to the broader artistic community and for bringing a distinctive stage presence to the show.
The broader episode underscores the ongoing conversations around judging criteria, audience expectations, and how mentors and guests influence the dynamics on talent programs. While the tone remained professional, the exchanges illustrated how different perspectives can shape public perception of fairness and opportunity on a competitive platform. Observers noted that the show continuously navigates the line between constructive criticism and entertainment value, recognizing that the goal is to nurture growth while maintaining high standards for performance.
As the series progresses, questions about favoritism, accountability, and the role of celebrity judges are likely to recur. The producers appear committed to transparent procedures and consistent evaluation, ensuring that participants receive meaningful feedback that can translate into long-term artistic development. The evolving dialogue among judges, mentors, and contestants reflects a broader industry trend toward clearer guidelines and fair treatment, which fans and participants alike have come to expect. These developments contribute to a narrative where success is measured not only by immediate applause but also by sustained improvement, resilience, and the ability to learn from every televised moment. In this dynamic environment, every critique becomes a stepping stone toward refining craft, confidence, and stage presence.
There has also been public interest in how favorite songs and performances influence judging opinions. For example, a segment featuring a participant performing a well-known track alongside featured collaborators drew both praise and scrutiny. Supporters highlighted the performer’s charm and vocal range, while some judges offered a more measured take on the interpretation and technique displayed on stage. The dialogue among the panel, contestants, and viewers continues to shape expectations about what constitutes a compelling performance, the value of risk-taking in interpretation, and the importance of staying true to personal artistic voice. As the show moves forward, the focus remains on nurturing talent and providing athletes of the arts with opportunities to shine while maintaining a fair and rigorous evaluation framework.
In related remarks, public commentary on favorite songs and performances often becomes a talking point for fans and commentators alike. The conversations around these moments reinforce the sense that a career in entertainment is built through consistency, adaptability, and a willingness to grow through critique. The program’s ongoing evolution suggests that future episodes will further illuminate how judges balance praise with constructive guidance, and how contestants respond when their performances are measured against high standards and evolving audience tastes. Overall, the season’s trajectory points toward a culture of continued learning, mutual respect among participants, and a shared commitment to excellence on stage.
Cumulatively, the season’s events reflect the show’s ongoing effort to maintain integrity while delivering engaging and inspirational moments for viewers. The emphasis remains on fostering talent, encouraging personal growth, and supporting a collaborative environment where young artists can develop their abilities under thoughtful mentorship. As audiences tune in to witness the progression, the dialogue among judges, contestants, and fans will likely continue to shape the program’s identity as a platform that champions skill, dedication, and the joy of artistic pursuit.