To take a brief crack at it, however, the Emmys have historically functioned as a space of legitimation, a function that we can obviously deconstruct and which is undoubtedly undermined by the process’ incapacity to judge television as an ongoing medium (with showy individual episodes beating out season-long performances). Looking to the Emmys as the arbiter of quality and taste is just as empty as looking at anyone or anything as the arbiter of quality and taste—such an arbiter does not and should not exist.

That being said, what interests me about the Emmys—and which to me gives them value—is the ways in which the industry seeks equal measures of validation of and distance from Emmy glory. The broadcast networks rely on the Emmys broadcast as a way to draw viewers and gain promotional attention for their own series when it’s their turn, while lamenting they have to provide free promotion for cable channels; the cable channels dismiss the importance of broadcast television but rely on the exposure from the Emmys to build subscriptions or encourage viewership. The Emmys have been at the center of the rise of cable, the rise of premium cable, the so-called “death of the broadcast networks,” and now the rise of Netflix, and over time have made numerous adjustments to the voting process and the voting rules in response to changes happening around them. In the end, however, they remain largely the same, just as television as a form has essentially endured despite such a tumultuous recent history.

What makes the Emmys interesting to me is that they’re not a reflection, but rather an active participant in these discourses of both television legitimation and the so-called “future of television,” a prism through which we can gain insight into how the industry understands—or doesn’t understand—these changes. The same goes for every awards show, whether the Grammys or the Oscars, but the television landscape changes so much more often that the Emmys offers a particularly rich case study for these industrial ebbs and flows. Rather than ascribe them importance over what television is good or bad, for me studying the Emmys acknowledges their participation in industrial discourses that seek to lay claim over those values.

I don’t know if this means we should invest in who does or does not win Emmy Awards—I often find myself doing this, but only because I watch a lot of TV and like to see performers I admire being rewarded. However, I do think we should invest in contextualizing the Emmys in an industrial context, even if we accept the facile nature of the exercise as it is positioned by the Academy in instances like this broadcast.

Thanks for your thoughtful comments (and for writing them so quickly–I was up when it went live, and I was deeply impressed.)