Grammy Awards – Antenna http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu Responses to Media and Culture Thu, 30 Mar 2017 23:48:47 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.7.5 And the Grammy Nominees are [On Twitter]… http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2014/12/05/and-the-grammy-nominees-are-on-twitter/ Fri, 05 Dec 2014 21:24:13 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=25173 Screen Shot 2014-12-05 at 3.12.45 PM

As viewing patterns have shifted dramatically over the past two decades, fragmenting audiences and delaying viewing in what we characterize as a post-network era, the televised award show has increased in value for broadcast networks. Live events work against delays, provide the possibility for social media buzz, and speak to a presumed broad audience that is becoming increasingly more difficult to capture with traditional programming. This has made the relative value of award shows increase, both for major awards (the Oscars, the Emmys, the Grammys) in respective media and lesser award shows that now have greater value than when they were perceived as illegitimate offshoots of the more reputable awards in said medium (such as the American Music Awards and the Billboard Music Awards, which are based on fan voting and record sales respectively).

Screen Shot 2014-12-05 at 3.15.48 PMOutside of isolated moments like Ellen Degeneres’ “Oscar Selfie,” however, major award shows in film and television have not necessarily changed their approach in light of their new value in a convergent media era, remaining largely the same in terms of flow and structure. By comparison, the Grammy Awards have gone through a tremendous overhaul, dramatically altering the number of awards presented during the televised ceremony, and shifting to a more substantial number of performances. While the presence of performances has always been a key draw for the Grammy Awards, the increase in the number of performances—going from 8 in 2004 to 20 in 2014—has shifted the ceremony further toward the live event spectacle that cuts through the challenges of broadcast television so effectively in the current moment. CBS has even built on its success with a yearly concert special timed to the Grammy nominations in December, announcing the nominees for “Album of the Year” and other major categories as part of a concert “preview”—this year with a holiday theme—of the January or February ceremony before releasing the full list.

If the changes to the Grammy ceremony itself reflect shifts in audience viewing patterns within traditional media, the strategy the Recording Academy is using to reveal this year’s nominees represents a more dramatic move away from traditional media. The release of award nominations has historically been handled through early-morning press conferences, wherein professionals within the respective field teams up with the Academy president to reveal major nominations ahead of the release of the full list of nominees shortly after. These take place at roughly 5:30am in Los Angeles, a time chosen in order to coordinate with the morning shows on the East Coast, with the nominations typically simulcast by one or more of them. It is an old tradition that has adjusted to include livestreaming, and that the Grammys has shifted to Primetime in recent years, but it remains predominantly tethered to an old media stalwart.

This year, however, the Recording Academy partnered with Twitter to reveal the majority of the nominees for this year’s awards one-by-one over the course of the day: although anchored by nominees Ed Sheeran and Pharrell on CBS This Morning and the Album of the Year reveal on the CBS nominations special, therefore retaining a tie to traditional broadcast environments, the partnership with Twitter is where the vast majority of discourse around the awards circulated today. Whereas all award shows are now actively engaged in social media, tweeting congratulations to nominees in hopes of retweets and further follows, the Grammys are not simply tweeting the nominees from their own account (which has 1.7 million followers): instead, they have parceled out the categories among a number of former winners or contemporaries in respective categories (Vampire Weekend, Joy Williams, Mark Ronson), prominent YouTube stars with musical aspirations and strong social media followings (Troye Silvan), syndicated entertainment shows or personalities (Ryan Seacrest, Access Hollywood, The Insider), and perennial Grammys host LL Cool J, among others—I’ve collected a Storify of most of them here. With most using the integrated video function on Twitter, and with each video including a plug for the Emmy Award ceremony on CBS in February, the videos serve to make the nominations themselves visible to a broader audience, suggesting a careful curation of “presenters” and potential audiences across various genres.

Screen Shot 2014-12-05 at 3.03.27 PMIt’s a decision that has confounded the traditional way nominations are covered in the entertainment industry: whereas journalists can typically speak to narratives in the awards, sites are now forced to gradually collect and collate information, building narratives—who has the most nominations, who was snubbed in certain categories—on the fly with only limited perspective until the majority of nominees (all but album of the year) were finally posted around 2pm ET. Beyoncé’s single announced nomination early in the day allowed her to pass Dolly Parton to become the most nominated female artist of all time, but anyone who ran that story needed to update it to reflect her final nomination count, which will remain unclear until tonight’s broadcast. Sam Smith tweeted about earning four nominations before getting out of bed, but that number increased shortly after, necessitating another message updating the number to five.

Screen Shot 2014-12-05 at 3.08.38 PMThe presence of social media has privileged live events because they are something people “talk about,” and have the potential to spread beyond their initial viewing audience as online buzz pushes people to tune in. In this case, the Grammys are tapping into the same potential for social media to spread word about the nominations, creating an environment where it is impossible for anyone engaged with entertainment journalists or musicians on Twitter to avoid Grammys reporting over the course of the day as artists and outlets livetweet their reactions to the nominations rollout. Whereas “Oscar Nominations Morning” has become a tradition in the context of social media, with Twitter and other social media conversations focused on what is considered a major industry event, the Grammys have sought to claim an entire day, an effort that shows how the adoption of social media is influencing established spaces of industry practice.

It is also an additional reminder that while who wins or is nominated for awards remains a key space of analysis for engaging with the place of awards in media industries and in culture more broadly, the process by which those nominees are determined or announced is equally central to the award show’s place within contemporary media studies.

Share

]]>
What Are You Missing? Feb 3-Feb 16 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2013/02/17/what-are-you-missing-feb-3-feb-16/ Sun, 17 Feb 2013 14:00:26 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=18598 TURBONetflix10 media news items you might have missed recently:

1) Not as many people tuned into the Super Bowl on February 3rd as the previous 2 years, but it still managed to be the 3rd most watched game despite the 34 minute blackout during the game, which some brands used to their advantage.  The game also failed to boost ratings for the CBS Monday lineup. Many viewed the Super Bowl ads as disappointing and not reflexive of the interests of younger generations.  However, the game set a record for the most social media interactions connected to an event.  Some campaigns used social media prior to the game, for example Budweiser’s campaign to get people to offer suggestions and vote on the name of the baby Clydesdale used in their ad this year (They chose Hope).  The FCC decided to ignore Joe Flacco’s swearing at the end of the game, which has sparked very little backlash.

2) Netflix released all 13 episodes of House of Cards, its original series, on Feb. 1st.  While Netflix execs have been reluctant to release viewer statistics, general buzz suggests that the show’s premiere was a success, and it has been generating a lot of talk about what this means for both Netflix and the future of TV viewing.  Netflix plans to continue creating original programming, both another season of House of Cards and a children’s show, Turbo, in conjunction with DreamWorks.  Netflix was also facing a court case from shareholders who felt that the company misled them by inflating its share price, but the case was thrown out.

3) Network and cable TV have been dealing with their own issues, such as a big ratings slump for NBC that might cause some mid-season shifts in the schedule.  Comcast purchased the remaining shares of NBC from its former parent company GE.  As a side note, in an unusual bid for Oscar attention, Warner Brothers bought 30 minutes of prime time on NBC to promote Argo.   CBS tried to use online extras to generate excitement for the Grammy awards.  CBS also acquired a share in AXS TV in exchange for programming and marketing.  Time Warner is increasing original programming on TNT and TBS, and FX continues to use dark, risque material to draw fans and create a niche for themselves.

4)  xbox remains the top selling gaming system for the 25th month in a row, selling over 281 thousand units in January.  But could it be that in the future Apple will overtake the gaming system market?

5) Some news on film distribution around the globe: European TV stations are not acquiring as many art cinema films, leaving even successful distributors in a difficult situation when trying to find an audience for these films.  In Japan, hulu.jp is experimenting with allowing a limited number of people to stream a film, Sougen no isu, for free before it is released theatrically.

6) Barnes and Noble had another disappointing quarter.  Book sales are not in trouble everywhere though, India’s publishing industry is showing steady growth despite the decrease in global markets.  Amazon is attempting to break into the ebook market in China, but is facing several obstacles including the lack of available kindles for purchase and piracy issues.  Apple’s ibookstore highlights self-published books, perhaps another sign of the changing print industry landscape.

7) The house subcommittee met to talk about preserving global internet freedom from government control.  On other internet news, AOL had surprisingly good 4th quarter revenues.  They have also re-branded their advertising.com group as AOL Networks, to emphasize the link with its parent company.

8) The Grammy awards took place on February 10th, setting the second largest record for social media interactions.  The awards led to an increase in album sales from the previous week, although the numbers are down from where they were at this time last year.  In other music news, Lady Gaga’s tour has been cancelled due to a hip injury, and approximately 200 thousand tickets will have to be refunded.

9) Dell Inc. goes private in a $24 billion leveraged buyout, in an attempt to rework the company to provide a wide range of products for corporations.  In other buyout news, John Malone’s Liberty Global acquired UK’s Virgin Media, putting him in position to compete in the UK’s pay TV market.

10) Some fun things to end with: Remember tamagotchi keychain pets?  Well now there’s an app for that.  Currently only available for Android devices, it should be available for Apple in the near future.  For those fans of the Alamo Draft House in Austin, they announced plans to open a second location in Kalamazoo, Michigan.  And this week’s newest internet sensation… Doing the Harlem Shake (and thinking about how to get the most out of it)

Share

]]>
1984 All Over Again: The 2012 Grammy Awards Telecast http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2012/02/15/1984-all-over-again-the-2012-grammy-awards-telecast/ http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2012/02/15/1984-all-over-again-the-2012-grammy-awards-telecast/#comments Wed, 15 Feb 2012 14:48:28 +0000 http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/?p=12227 Bon IverI’m going to say this up front:  I’m a music snob, and I hate the very idea of the Grammy Awards.  If you’re looking for dispassionate analysis, stop reading now.

Why do I hate the Grammys so?  In large part because the Recording Academy, the name used by the organization that presents the annual telecast, purports to speak for the music industry writ large.  It doesn’t.  There isn’t a music industry, there are several parallel and unequal music industries.  The Recording Academy limned out one of these parallel industries this year when they eliminated almost half of their awards, including a substantial number that presented Grammys in more “ethnic” categories, including several Latin awards, large and growing potential audience or not.

The Grammy Awards celebrate the big Music Industry, the one that has the lock on radio formats and televised singing contests, and that still manages to move lots of hard copies of recorded products. I could call it mainstream, but I think it’s an idea of mainstream more than a material mainstream. Or, I could call it the “residual” music industry, but there are ways in which it is still dominant, at least in theory.  The Grammy Awards are one of the ways that it maintains that fiction.  Throw a big, glossy celebration on television, feature bands that people like me wouldn’t know if they stopped us on the street and gave us a special performance, allow a controlled amount of crossover from one of the parallel music industries (sorry, Justin Vernon, that you showed up to receive your award at all kind of cancels out your reluctant acceptance speech), and call it Music’s Biggest Night. This year it kind of worked, as the telecast drew its best ratings since 1984.  But the show may have drawn that audience only because of the death of one of the self-proclaimed Music Industry’s most representative artists, Whitney Houston, the day before.  That, and the hype about Adele, who as predicted swept the Grammy table, taking home six of them.

For a while it seemed like the broadcast was hastily re-engineered into a Whitney-fest, squeezing in “Grammy moments” featuring Houston.  The evening’s host, LL Cool J, led the audience in the Staples Center and presumably, those at home, in a prayer for Houston.  Many artists and presenters said kind words about Houston throughout the evening, and Jennifer Hudson’s rendition of “I Will Always Love You” was moving and for a program riddled with overblown (Nicki Minaj) or underthought (whatever that dance tribute to Don Cornelius was) routines, nicely conceived.

Overall the program felt like a transmission from 1984 or 1985, before digital technologies ravaged the Music Industry’s bottom line, but with modern set design and technological trickery.  In this vision of 1984, wife or partner abuse hadn’t yet emerged as an important social and cultural problem, so the Recording Academy presented us with three appearances by Chris Brown, even as his victim, Rihanna, participated in the proceedings.  In this 1984, rock, or rawk, still rools!  Especially Brooce!  Bruce Springsteen opened, singing a populist anthem about how “we take care of our own.”  Perhaps he should write a check to the many musicians in one of the parallel music industries who are living without healthcare, or otherwise scraping by. I stopped counting after the four shots of Paul McCartney and his wife in the first ten minutes.  James Brown, er, Bruno Mars followed dressed for the Apollo even further back, circa 1964.

As much as I don’t want to, during this telecast I found myself agreeing with Simon Reynolds.  Retromania has taken over music, there’s nothing new going on.  Then again, in the Grammy’s Music Industry, there’s no retromania because the record-selling/reissuing oldsters haven’t gone away.  The list of aging performers included what’s left of the Beach Boys, Glen Campbell, Paul McCartney (twice), the Foo Fighters (twice) and Tony Bennett.  Several very bland newer bands, reminding me of some of the white mainstream of the 1980s (remember Christopher Cross, anyone?) also performed.  Country was represented in several rather conservatively staged numbers, and yet another Taylor Swift diss of Kanye West (a no-show). Oh, Bonnie Raitt was half of a too-short tribute to Etta James.  In this parallel universe represented by the Grammy Awards, women don’t rock or do much beyond dance and dress up as smurfs in bondage gear (yes, I’m talking about you, Katy Perry).  Or they do the obligatory “I’ve reached the point in my career in which I must take on the Catholic Church” number (Nicki Minaj) that seems de rigeur for every pop artist in since Madonna in, you guessed it, the mid-1980s.

Unless they’re Adele.  I like Adele, and Rolling in the Deep is the rare ubiquitous song whose enduring earworm is not at all annoying.  I like her look, and the fact that she’s zaftig and proud of it. Her sound is at the same time a throwback and contemporary.  It’s a true crossover, much like Houston’s 25 years earlier.  And it sells lots and lots of records.  As deserving as she is, I fear that Adele’s coronation as the new Queen of Pop could decrease the volume of other, more adventurous, more diverse voices on the pop scene.  (Scepter or not, Lady Gaga was a non-presence at this year’s awards.) Then again, the Grammy’s celebrate those who still move large quantities of recorded product, and that more than any other agenda will continue to drive their award ceremony for years to come.  I don’t think I’ll be watching.

Share

]]>
http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/2012/02/15/1984-all-over-again-the-2012-grammy-awards-telecast/feed/ 1