Grammys: Five reasons not to tune in
The Grammys -- the awards show that music fans love to hate. But it's also the only legit one we have, and while not always succeeding, it makes a genuine effort to walk the line between artistic achievements and populist entertainment. But is it worth enduring medley after medley?
Click here for five reasons to watch, but here are five reasons not to tune in:
1. Relevancy, or lack thereof. As the major record labels must adjust their business models in the face of declining sales and file sharing, so too must the Grammys reevaluate their broadcast. For one thing, the eligibility period (Oct. 1, 2006, to Sept. 30, 2007 this time) should be rewritten. As noted weeks ago, plenty of the year's best music wasn't even eligible for a Grammy. Alicia Keys will perform, and her single "No One" is nominated, but she'll have to wait until 2009 for the best album of her career to get Grammy recognition. Radiohead? Not eligible. Jay-Z even lapped the Grammys. "American Gangster" is one of the rapper's stronger efforts, but the Grammys still haven't even gotten around to honoring one of his weaker efforts, 2006's "Kingdom Come."
2. Beyonce. The 2008 Beyonce Tour of Televised Galas begins here! Let's at least hope she comes up with something better than her pairing with Sugarland at the AMAs. But if Beyonce is a predictable choice, it's reflective of the Grammys as a whole. Indeed, when it comes to this year's performance line-up, the only drama appears to be in who will or won't show up (Amy Winehouse? Michael Jackson?), and what shape they'll be in when they get there.
3. Where are the independents? The Grammys have always honored the efforts of the major labels ahead of the independents. Such oversights were more excusable 10 years ago, when the majors and indies seemed to operate in two different worlds and radio defined pop music. That's no longer the case, as more and more of today's big artists are finding ways to work outside the major label system (see Radiohead and the Eagles, another ineligible album) and more and more independent artists are appearing atop the U.S. pop chart. Sooner rather than later the Grammys will have to recognize that the tide has shifted from the major labels to the Internet. But can that be done without sacrificing ratings?
4. The Grammys recognize great music -- just not on TV. Throughout the Grammys' bloated 110 categories, there's plenty of swell music to be had (as noted over here). Unfortunately, most of it is celebrated during a lengthy pre-show void of all press and television. (They're all on the red carpet awaiting the stars.) It's nice to recognize some smaller acts, but does it matter if no one sees it?
5. There is a category for new/adventurous music -- it's just not utilized as such. The best-new-artist category is the one televised award in which the Grammys truly have the opportunity to be about discovery -- but seldom are. Though the category states that it will honor the "first recording that establishes the public identity of the artist," it's still a bit much to honor an artist with a nearly 10-year career (Ledisi) or one who's been on Warped Tour multiple years running (Paramore). There needs to be a greater effort to dig beneath the surface and not just honor artists once they're discovered by a major label. And going forward, no "American Idol" contestant should ever be eligible for best new artist.
(Beyonce photo courtesy Anne Cusack / Los Angeles Times)


I remember hearing the same comments about the Grammys back in 1966. Except then, it was tape-recording instead of file sharing, and instead of Beyonce Knowles, it was Steve Lawrence and Edyie Gorme. The more things change, the more they stay the same!
Posted by: David V | February 06, 2008 at 01:48 PM
As a person who worked intimately in the Los Angeles record industry for almost a decade, I can honestly say that the music/recording industry has been at its lowest point for nearly the last decade. Where things have gone is sickening. All flash. No substance.
Posted by: Jon K. | February 06, 2008 at 02:45 PM
Who Cares... The Grammys is/are dead.
Posted by: Gene Vincent | February 06, 2008 at 03:22 PM
Ledisi has had a career longer than 10 years, but in truth, her first solo CD didn't come out until 1999. It was independently released as was the second album She is much deserving especially when you consider that even on a major label, most folks still don't know who she is. Ledisi is an AMAZING artist, especially in live performance. What a lost art that is.
Posted by: Cecile T. | February 06, 2008 at 05:03 PM
Unfortunately, the Grammys have never been about the best in American music. Rather, they are a popularity contest for the mainstream and were more relevant when the recording industry and major labels controlled nearly everything. True independent artists and music was rarely recognized. Some of the most influential songwriters and musicians that you've probably never heard of outside of the mainstream, were never recognized. The Grammys are a waste of time.
Posted by: Christian Hokenson | February 06, 2008 at 05:13 PM
If Kristin Hersh is ever recognized with a Grammy award, I'd drop dead in front of the TV. Shame it will never happen, but here's an artist who's discography and songwriting are superior to most "artists" the Grammys do actually recognize. Good riddance to the mainstream, good riddance to the RIAA and the major labels. Now that music genres are thoroughly fractured and the iPod and MP3's reign supreme as the source of new music, award shows like this are increasingly irrelevant.
Posted by: Christian Hokenson | February 06, 2008 at 05:24 PM
Katt Williams once said,a haters job is to hate,so those of you who have no one to hate,feel free and hate on Beyonce,WE ALL KNOW SHE IS THE BOMB!
Posted by: Charles | February 07, 2008 at 12:34 AM
I just think that Beyonce is awesome.
Posted by: j. | February 07, 2008 at 05:48 AM
If you are going to mention ledisi's long career you must also mention Feist. And if you have ever heard Ledisi perform live or listened to her albums you would know that if just based on vocals she would win the category.
Posted by: Malcolm | February 07, 2008 at 08:28 AM
Ok,
Tired of Rap/Hippity Hop/Gang Rap - the hole tamale.
Keys, Beyonce, Winehouse, Brown,Rihanna, Kanye, MJ Blige.
Hip Hop Nation never was, the rest of us went stone cold silent.
If you did not let the Rude Dude from Attitude Lewd spit in your face and jerk his hand where ever the _ _ _ well pleased you were racist. Well I do not think so! I am sick and tired of that dirty crap passed off as any kind of music. I fart in your general direction.
Posted by: Triple A | February 07, 2008 at 06:20 PM
Waoh, i love this pix she looks so kinky and she's gonna be on my weekly celebrity's List....................................................
www.messagegarden.9f.com
www.sendfreesmstoanycountry.blogspot.com
Posted by: Gbenga | February 08, 2008 at 06:43 AM
Waoh, i love this pix she looks so kinky and she's gonna be on my weekly celebrity's List....................................................
www.messagegarden.9f.com
www.sendfreesmstoanycountry.blogspot.com
Posted by: Gbenga | February 08, 2008 at 06:51 AM
It is so crazy that the same people who overexposed Beyonce, now hate her. I love Beyonce, Kanye, and Mary J are the only reasons I am watching. I think she is the joint. I REPEAT, STOP HATING!!!
Posted by: blondiedred | February 10, 2008 at 01:09 PM