Tuesday, February 15, 2005

Somebody Better Pass a Law

This from Neal Boortz.

"The Grammy Awards for last Sunday night got the lowest ratings in nine years. There were 25% fewer Americans watching the show than there were one year ago. No surprise to me. With what we are passing off as music these days, I'm surprised the ratings were as high as they were."

Somehow, this is going to be blamed on Peer to Peer networks. Trust me, it will.

My view is that the Grammy Awards suffers from too much diversity. (I know, how is this possible?) I think that the CMA's and the Vibe Awards and such are more appropriate and significant awards than the Grammy. These award shows hit their targets. Moreover, they reward the best artists of the year - not just those that sold the most records.

The reason I don't watch is not because there aren't good acts at the Grammys, it's because I have to put up with so much stuff that I'm not interested in. Essentially, the Grammy's take a selection of good music, but after the nominations, take what amounts to the lowest common denominator - or whoever wins the Grammy is the least offensive choice or simply the most mainstream. The Grammy award is the most behind-the-times award out there.

Seriously, if Ray Charles hadn't passed away (a great loss to music in general), would his album have even been nominated for a Grammy? Would it have won best album? Heck no. The Grammy needs to get rid of any category that compares Kanye West to Wilco to Britney Spears, etc. It also needs to ensure that its voters have actually listened to all the music (which I'm sure they would claim happens), and ardently state that voters should not factor album sales into the equation. Sure they'd end up getting it wrong just as often, but at least I could respect the award that way.



Post a Comment

<< Home