When Star Magazine picks up on a story, well, then, you know it must be big.

The trashy tabloid was but one media outlet that recently reported -- with poorly masked glee -- that interest in "American Idol" is slipping.

Ever since the Los Angeles Times detailed in an April 21 story that "Idol's" ratings had slipped 7 percent -- to 29.2 million -- from the same point in season six, it's been a relentless parade of frantic headlines.

"Idol to replace Ryan Seacrest!" "Paula demolishes show's credibility!" "Michael Johns booted too early!"

That sort of thing.

But let's look at this reasonably.

Yes, numbers are down, particularly among women 18 to 34 and kids 2 to 11, the latter demographic considered the breeding ground for future "Idol" success.

For some, it might simply be a case of the seven-year itch.

But recent Nielsen data ranking the top shows of the season through April 27 post "Idol's" Tuesday and Wednesday airings in the highest two spots, with season-to-date viewers averaging about 28 million for Tuesday's performance show and just under 27 million for the Wednesday results night.

The next closest? "Desperate Housewives" -- with 17.5 million.

It's a fact that "Idol" numbers have dipped compared with seasons past, but somehow I doubt Tina Fey would quibble if her brilliant "30 Rock" pulled in 28 million viewers every week.

And how about what "Idol" has done right this season, such as striking a deal with iTunes so fans can download contestants' performances hours after the live broadcast?

Fox doesn't allow iTunes to release statistics about downloads, in fairness to the contestants -- such as, if you saw that David Cook had the highest number of downloads, you might be swayed to vote for him because of that popularity. But word around the industry is that it's been a very successful endeavor.

Still, with its slight erosion in ratings, the show could use some freshening -- as would anything after seven years.

Some unsolicited suggestions:

1. More Elliott Yamins: That isn't a blatant advertisement for Richmond's "Idol" guy, but an example of how the show works best.

As much as I liked Carly Smithson and Chris Daughtry and even the current Cook, there's something slightly less gratifying about watching performers who already know what they're doing.

With my rules, no semipros would be allowed. I don't care if you had an album contract for three seconds in 2001 (and in today's DIY world, that's pretty likely); if you recorded anything professionally or earned a dime for a public performance (bad karaoke contests not included), sorry, not allowed in the treehouse.

People tend to be a little more emotionally invested when rooting for a pharmacy clerk than for a guy who's been filling Birmingham, Ala., clubs for several years already.

2. More originality: Still allow contestants the option to play an instrument, but throw in a week or two when they have to write and perform their own material, even if it's with the help of a professional songwriter.

That accomplishes two things: It weeds out the theme-park singers (and saves us from a bunch of covers albums from the contestants who placed eighth), and it prevents the judges from spouting their favorite criticism -- that the performance was a mere imitation of Whitney, Mariah, Stevie, et al. Well, yeah. What else would it be?

3. Bring back celebs as judges: Instead of having Natasha Bedingfield or Leona Lewis make random these-people-are-here-because-??? appearances to plug their new singles, put them to work as judges or mentors, and mix it up with veterans such as Neil Diamond and Billy Joel and contemporary chart busters such as Rihanna and Usher.

Maybe this season's experiment to focus less on famous folks and more on the dull, I mean, fascinating, minutiae of Kristy Lee Cook's horses didn't work as well as the producers expected.

4. Don't mess with what works: Yeah, Paula Abdul is often a loopy mess. And maybe last week's Paulagate fiasco with Jason Castro dented the credibility of one of the few reality shows that seemed as if it could be mostly authentic.

But fire her and you take away not only the only tender heart behind that judges' table but a personality millions might watch for the wrong reasons hoping she implodes -- but they still watch nonetheless.

And Seacrest? Talk about a guy who is mercilessly harassed in the press for no reason. Not only is he an admirable workaholic, but I'd challenge anyone to do that job and make it look as effortless as he does.

Look no further than Paulagate for proof of his quick thinking and as-smooth-as-possible extraction from a nightmare of a moment.

5. Tweak "Idol Gives Back": I'm all for charity and of course commend the "Idol" crew for taking advantage of its captive audience and developing a way to help others.

But people get less generous the more they're asked to put their hand in their pocket. They also get less generous when made to suffer through 2½ hours of nonsense such as Teri Hatcher singing (I like her . . . as an actress), Fergie doing cartwheels and a pageant of taped celebrities trying to be endearing.

Maybe make the charity event an every-other-year thing, or turn it into a live, one-hour show to ramp up a sense of urgency and not conflict with the results show of "Dancing With the Stars" on ABC.

I'm pretty sure I can live without an annual appearance by John Cena and Selma Blair. How about you? mruggieri@timesdispatch.com.