SubscribeFLASH: Anne Hathaway Golden Globes blunder explained by HFPA
More than 24 hours after the Hollywood Foreign Press Assn.'s website seemed to reveal Anne Hathaway as winner for best actress, the group has finally addressed questions about whether someone made a simple typo or a major blunder.
On Thursday evening, someone in Honduras paid a visit to the HFPA website, clicked on a link marked "nominations and winners" and found that one category listed not only its nominees but also denoted its winner (by highlighting and putting a star next to it) a full three nights before the 66th annual Golden Globes ceremony at which the winners of all categories were supposed to be announced.
If the spoiler snafu is true of the aforementioned category, best actress in a motion picture drama, then Hathaway ("Rachel Getting Married") will prevail over fellow nominees Angelina Jolie ("Changeling"), Meryl Streep ("Doubt"), Kristin Scott Thomas ("I've Loved You So Long") and Kate Winslet ("Revolutionary Road").
The Honduran brought his discovery to the attention of celebrity gossip blogger Perez Hilton, who broke the news to the rest of us at 7 p.m. EST Thursday -- right around the time that Hathaway was picking up one-half of the Critics' Choice Award for best actress.
Naturally, this confluence of events spurred the question: Had the Honduran stumbled upon something that had no basis in fact (a pre-Globes test of the website by a careless webmaster, perhaps?) or a major discovery?
The HFPA's initial response failed to address the question. On Thursday evening, shortly after Hilton's post went live, Hathaway was reverted back to a mere nominee on their website. Then, on Friday afternoon, they posted a statement on their website that read:
"In the process of preparing for Sunday’s Golden Globe Awards, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association web team inadvertently marked a nominee as a winner. The mistake was immediately corrected."
On Friday evening, I contacted the office of HFPA publicist Michael Russell to follow up on that because I felt it failed to answer the most pressing questions: Although the incident was obviously a "mistake," as they characterized it, I wanted to know if (a) the person on their "web team" was in any way privy to the actual results, and (b) how voting results are secured by the HFPA -- do they, like the academy, use an outside firm like Price Waterhouse Cooper?
I never received a response, but when I checked the site again shortly after 3 a.m. EST/12 a.m. PST on Saturday morning, the statement had been "updated," retitled "For the Record" and finally addressed the lingering questions I had posed. It read(s):
"In the process of preparing for Sunday's Golden Globe Awards, a technician working on the Hollywood Foreign Press Association's website made a mistake and a name of a nominee was randomly marked as a winner. The mistake was immediately corrected.
The ballots are tabulated by the accounting firm of Ernst & Young LLP. Only four executives of the accounting firm know the identity of the winners before the envelopes are opened and recipients are announced during the live telecast. No one else, including the members of the HFPA, knows who the winners are prior to the live announcement."
I'll take the HFPA at their word -- after all, assuming it was just a technician testing the website, it makes sense that he would mark the first name in the alphabetically ordered category as the winner, rather than the second, third, fourth or fifth. But those who suspect that this was more than just a simple error could well find support for their belief -- valid or not -- if Hathaway does indeed prevail on Sunday evening, which seems to be an increasingly likely scenario.
Photo: Anne Hathaway -- pictured here attending the world premiere of "Rachel Getting Married" at the Venice Film Festival in September -- could still get the last laugh following this tease. Credit: Getty Images
Scott Feinberg is a film industry awards analyst. He boasts one of the best track records at projecting the Academy Awards, including a 21 for 24 effort in 2006, first among all pundits according to OscarCentral and Variety. Feinberg, who studied film at Yale University and Brandeis University, is the founder of 
who cares ? Americans are obsessed with hollywood and their overpaid stars. it's a sickness... pay more attention to your kids grades and stop reading people and us magazine.
Posted by: bingo hall | January 10, 2009 at 09:59 AM
The results for such awards are usually closely-guarded secrets for obvious reasons. No matter the truth, it will HAVE to be an electronic "glitch" or no one will trust the announced results, making the awards pointless. So much is built on trust.
Posted by: Carole Clarke | January 10, 2009 at 09:59 AM
To Carole Clarke: if that is the case and you don't care about the results or the story, then why are you reading this story and posting a comment? You obviously DO have an interest in this too.
Posted by: Bill Lee | January 10, 2009 at 12:41 PM
I agree. Who cares. Everyone knows that these awards are pretty meaningless.
Posted by: Anon | January 10, 2009 at 12:42 PM
It is a "closed" society where every one will eventually get an award. It is a joke.
Posted by: francis | January 10, 2009 at 12:42 PM
What's with the anit-american rant. Have you ever noted the forgein pulications and media? People in Britain, Italy, India or many Asian countries are no less obsessed. Get out of the myopic bubble and look around a bit.
Posted by: Ron | January 10, 2009 at 12:43 PM
For goodness' sake.. WHO CARES about this forgettable piece of triviality that you are focusing on. .?
Can't you just stay busy by picking some lint from your navel, instead..??
This is a NOTHING story.
You can do better than this.
Try.
Posted by: Helen | January 10, 2009 at 12:43 PM
Stop wasting the space on the internet. This is meaningless.
Posted by: John | January 10, 2009 at 01:32 PM
"Stop wasting the space on the internet. This is meaningless."
Well said. That comment could be posted anywhere and still be a waste of space.
By the way, bingo, if you're going to side with education, please watch the typos.
Posted by: goofus | January 10, 2009 at 01:47 PM
It really doesn't matter...like someone else said: if she wins, its rigged, if she doesn't she lost out to keep people from thinking its rigged. I don't care for her acting and think that there are others on that list who deserve the award. That's why I don't watch: its a popularity contest and not based on a person's QUALITY of work. Hathaway is not worthy.
Posted by: Rigged | January 10, 2009 at 03:14 PM
What a lemming!! She is "AGAINST RICK WARREN.." How orginal sweetie. FYI, your hero and Mesiah, Barack Nobama and his sidekick, Joe biden, have also stated that THEY are against changing the definition of traditional marriage! Shocker!! BUT, because Rick is a Christian, OHHH scary to those in Hellwood, you would consisder turning your back on him. You hack!! All of these liberals PLEASE google the sadleback talks AND the debates. BOTH are loud and clear that they will NOT support GAY MARRIAGE!! Stick to acting like all the other drug addicted, high school drop out criminals do. Also, the funniest side effect, if you can call it that, of this getting out all the blacks to vote, is that 70% of blacks apparently DO NOT want gays to marry. Funny. Only 50% of whites really cared. HA!!
Posted by: Mrspk | January 10, 2009 at 04:13 PM
Ann Hathawat has South American origins.
Posted by: movie fan | January 10, 2009 at 04:13 PM
Damm I was hoping (praying) it was a waredrobe malfunction or maybe she admitted to being a nazi. Instead it is a webpage typo.......BORING.
Posted by: Chris | January 10, 2009 at 05:02 PM
How could anyone in his or her right mind take anything uttered, posted, published, or distributed in any other way by such a slime-dwelling buffoon as Perez Hilton seriously? His very existence is a blot on humanity.
Posted by: Andrew Adler | January 10, 2009 at 05:53 PM
What on earth does Rick Warren or gay marriage have to do with the Golden Globes?
Posted by: RBBrittain | January 10, 2009 at 06:25 PM
"Ann Hathawat has South American origins.
" -- what the hell is that supposed to mean?
Hathaway in Rachel Getting Married is decent and deserving enough and wouldn't be a surprising win. Where is all this vitriol coming from? calm that down.
Posted by: kate | January 10, 2009 at 06:46 PM
Why do all of you who feel this is a waste of space Feel so compelled to spend more time on this worthless issue by taking the time to post a comment?
This could seriously damage the award shows if the winners are in fact known before the show airs. There would be a big loss of public trust.
You also show a great lack of understanding of the economics of Hollywood. A win would mean a significant rise in Ms Hathaway's per film income. Not to mention that it would make her parents really proud.
Posted by: Greg | January 11, 2009 at 12:17 AM
If Al Franken wins best supporting actress then something is very very fishy
Posted by: Magina Normberry | January 11, 2009 at 01:05 AM