Rage Against the X Factor

[Geetar]

And then - I hear the version of his single that's been released and Joe's voice has been auto-tuned to within an inch of its life, removing some of the character and making it sound bland and generic.

If there was anyone that didn't need auto-tune, it was him... I wonder if it's the case now that the studios just assume people can't sing that well and automatically apply lashings of effects?

I haven't heard the single, so I can't comment in this specific case; however, I've heard of numerous instances where it's been explicitly stated by the executive wing of music destruction that the voice requires a run through the mangler to produce the specific artefacts that "Otto" brings to the party.  

It has become the de-facto "sound" of pop to many, seemingly.

[LivingForever]

I haven't heard the single, so I can't comment in this specific case; however, I've heard of numerous instances where it's been explicitly stated by the executive wing of music destruction that the voice requires a run through the mangler to produce the specific artefacts that "Otto" brings to the party.  

It has become the de-facto "sound" of pop to many, seemingly.

Sadly, you seem to be right. I can see why it's done to:

a) fix tiny mistakes when there's not enough time to redo it (or for a live recording)
b) Make people who REALLY can't sing sound less awful (comedy records, etc?)
c) make a cool effect a-la T-Pain (although this has been overused to the point of tedium)

What I can't understand is using it to smooth out and genericise people's voices. I think Michael Buble must be the worst example of this - I can't understand why anyone would buy one of his records when you can listen to Sinatra or someone who doesn't sound like a robot.

As an aside, Jem once pointed out to me that John Mitchell used absolutely tons of Autotune on 'The Tall Ships' - which is quite noticeable really - I can only assume it was done for reason 'c' above, since the guy can most definitely sing in tune.