matty005
3x Platinum Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 3,418
|
Post by matty005 on Feb 16, 2016 17:33:17 GMT -5
By the way, for all of this "Did Kanye make Taylor famous or not?" talk, here's my 2 cents. He did and didn't - it's not that relevant to me. If he wants to take credit, that's fine - it's annoying but it's fine and not totally off base. The first problem to me is the inclusion of the B word. Kanye said it's a term of endearment but we all know that is horribly misguided and the use of it belittles her more than taking credit for her fame. The second (and key) problem is implying that BECAUSE he "made her famous," that she owes him sex. This is extremely well said. And the thing is, for someone to become famous it takes more than one thing. "Love Story" and "You Belong With Me" were huge songs on their own, but their videos really made Taylor stand out. Should the people who came up with the ideas for those videos be taking credit for Taylor's fame? Taylor was able to open up for huge country artists like Brad Paisley and Keith Urban and showed her how to be a performer. Should they be taking credit? Taylor was able to get, "White Horse" on "Grey's Anatomy" right at the time of her "Fearless" release which really was the album that propelled her. Should Shonda Rimes take credit for her fame? My point is, it takes A LOT of things to happen and come together (some might say a perfect storm) for someone to become as famous as Taylor. No doubt, what Kanye did got Taylor's name out there, but for him to think he's the sole reason she is famous is about as stupid as you can be (and I like Kanye's music but he is wrong here).
|
|
Ling-Ling
Diamond Member
Kill Kill Kill Kill! Die Die Die!
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 13,553
|
Post by Ling-Ling on Feb 16, 2016 17:48:25 GMT -5
Can't Slow Down by Lionel Richie won the Grammy for AOTY 30 years ago. The other album of the year nominees: Born in the USA, Private Dancer, Purple Rain and She's So Unusual. 4 classics. I would even argue that Can't Slow Down is the weakest, even though is not a bad album. LMAO. Just goes to show how truly irrelevant these awards are. That album wasn't even recognized as the best album BACK THEN and time has been even more unkind to it. Award shows get it wrong 90% of the time and that's being generous, so it's best to take it all with a grain of salt.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,550
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 16, 2016 18:05:36 GMT -5
Can't Slow Down by Lionel Richie won the Grammy for AOTY 30 years ago. The other album of the year nominees: Born in the USA, Private Dancer, Purple Rain and She's So Unusual. 4 classics. I would even argue that Can't Slow Down is the weakest, even though is not a bad album. LMAO. Just goes to show how truly irrelevant these awards are. That album wasn't even recognized as the best album BACK THEN and time has been even more unkind to it. Award shows get it wrong 90% of the time and that's being generous, so it's best to take it all with a grain of salt. Well it was probably the safest choice that year, sure, but "Hello," "All Night Long," and "Stuck On You" are still remembered fairly well. It's not like Lionel Richie and the songs from the album were never heard from again. Something like Back on the Block is a much worse winner.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,550
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 16, 2016 18:09:21 GMT -5
By the way, for all of this "Did Kanye make Taylor famous or not?" talk, here's my 2 cents. He did and didn't - it's not that relevant to me. If he wants to take credit, that's fine - it's annoying but it's fine and not totally off base. The first problem to me is the inclusion of the B word. Kanye said it's a term of endearment but we all know that is horribly misguided and the use of it belittles her more than taking credit for her fame. The second (and key) problem is implying that BECAUSE he "made her famous," that she owes him sex. This is extremely well said. And the thing is, for someone to become famous it takes more than one thing. "Love Story" and "You Belong With Me" were huge songs on their own, but their videos really made Taylor stand out. Should the people who came up with the ideas for those videos be taking credit for Taylor's fame? Taylor was able to open up for huge country artists like Brad Paisley and Keith Urban and showed her how to be a performer. Should they be taking credit? Taylor was able to get, "White Horse" on "Grey's Anatomy" right at the time of her "Fearless" release which really was the album that propelled her. Should Shonda Rimes take credit for her fame? My point is, it takes A LOT of things to happen and come together (some might say a perfect storm) for someone to become as famous as Taylor. No doubt, what Kanye did got Taylor's name out there, but for him to think he's the sole reason she is famous is about as stupid as you can be (and I like Kanye's music but he is wrong here). Except notice what people (including the media) are talking about today; Swift's comments and her continued beef with Kanye. She just won AOTY for a second time, and instead of the focus being on that or her performance (like with Kendrick Lamar), the attention is on she and Kanye. Case closed.
|
|
kanimal
3x Platinum Member
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,043
|
Post by kanimal on Feb 16, 2016 18:22:42 GMT -5
The Grammy Awards, unsurprisingly, gave CBS a huge ratings win Monday night. The live telecast currently has a 7.4 rating drew a 7.7 rating in adults 18-49, per time zone-adjusted fast nationals. That’s down from 8.5 last season, when the awards aired in their usual Sunday spot. (Viewer numbers were about the same: 24.95 million vs. 25.3 million last year.) Pretty great ratings. Worst numbers in 7 years No Walking Dead competition. Monday helped the Emmys in 2014. It's possible the live west coast feed hurt them, but that's not an "excuse" since the west coast feed was added with the intent of BOOSTING, not hurting, viewership. Don't get me wrong, the numbers are huge by most TV standards. But not by Grammy standards - and expect to see a lot of press about how they're down (Hits Daily Double and Deadline have already put out such pieces).
|
|
matty005
3x Platinum Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 3,418
|
Post by matty005 on Feb 16, 2016 18:23:48 GMT -5
This is extremely well said. And the thing is, for someone to become famous it takes more than one thing. "Love Story" and "You Belong With Me" were huge songs on their own, but their videos really made Taylor stand out. Should the people who came up with the ideas for those videos be taking credit for Taylor's fame? Taylor was able to open up for huge country artists like Brad Paisley and Keith Urban and showed her how to be a performer. Should they be taking credit? Taylor was able to get, "White Horse" on "Grey's Anatomy" right at the time of her "Fearless" release which really was the album that propelled her. Should Shonda Rimes take credit for her fame? My point is, it takes A LOT of things to happen and come together (some might say a perfect storm) for someone to become as famous as Taylor. No doubt, what Kanye did got Taylor's name out there, but for him to think he's the sole reason she is famous is about as stupid as you can be (and I like Kanye's music but he is wrong here). Except notice what people (including the media) are talking about today; Swift's comments and her continued beef with Kanye. She just won AOTY for a second time, and instead of the focus being on that or her performance (like with Kendrick Lamar), the attention is on she and Kanye. Case closed. Case closed? What does that even mean? In case you forgot, Kanye was the one who brought this up again. She's just not allowed to respond to this? And if she does it proves that he made her famous? Nah.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,550
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 16, 2016 18:26:05 GMT -5
Except notice what people (including the media) are talking about today; Swift's comments and her continued beef with Kanye. She just won AOTY for a second time, and instead of the focus being on that or her performance (like with Kendrick Lamar), the attention is on she and Kanye. Case closed. Case closed? What does that even mean? In case you forgot, Kanye was the one who brought this up again. She's just not allowed to respond to this? And if she does it proves that he made her famous? Nah. I never said he made her famous. I've written my thoughts several times in this thread. What the media reaction proves is that this type of beef is what gets press and thus pop culture impact, and thus Kanye's stunt at the VMAs definitely took her to another level in that sense. It also shows that it was essentially a poor decision on her part because instead of the focus being on her accomplishment, her performance, or even her message to women, the focus is on Swift in relation to Kanye.
|
|
|
Post by when the pawn... on Feb 16, 2016 18:28:08 GMT -5
Did Kanye make Taylor Swift famous? No Did the Kanye/Taylor 2009 VMA incident make Taylor Swift more famous than she had been? Yes
The way I see it, there is no arguing either of those points.
The news today is certainly focusing on Taylor's speech and Kendrick's performance. Taylor is unquestionably a Celebrity and Kendrick is viewed as an Artist. Taylor also has sold a f***-ton of albums, won an a**load of awards and has a lot of industry clout. I'd be the first to jump down Taylor's throat at Kanye's defense but I don't see how any of this BS in the last week reflects poorly on Taylor...except for her wonky performance last night ;).
|
|
matty005
3x Platinum Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 3,418
|
Post by matty005 on Feb 16, 2016 18:30:14 GMT -5
Case closed? What does that even mean? In case you forgot, Kanye was the one who brought this up again. She's just not allowed to respond to this? And if she does it proves that he made her famous? Nah. I never said he made her famous. I've written my thoughts several times in this thread. What the media reaction proves is that this type of beef is what gets press and thus pop culture impact, and thus Kanye's stunt at the VMAs definitely took her to another level in that sense. It also shows that it was essentially a poor decision on her part because instead of the focus being on her accomplishment, her performance, or even her message to women, the focus is on Swift in relation to Kanye. I don't get what you were saying case closed about? My comment was about Kanye thinking he made Taylor famous. Then you commented contradictory to me and ended it with case closed. So how am I supposed to know what you're saying case closed is about?
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,550
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 16, 2016 18:33:37 GMT -5
Did Kanye make Taylor Swift famous? No Did the Kanye/Taylor 2009 VMA incident make Taylor Swift more famous than she had been? Yes The way I see it, there is no arguing either of those points. The news today is certainly focusing on Taylor's speech and Kendrick's performance. Taylor is unquestionably a Celebrity and Kendrick is viewed as an Artist. Taylor also has sold a f***-ton of albums, won an a**load of awards and has a lot of industry clout. I'd be the first to jump down Taylor's throat at Kanye's defense but I don't see how any of this BS in the last week reflects poorly on Taylor...except for her wonky performance last night ;). In general it doesn't reflect poorly on Swift, other than some of us think her bragging about it was in poor taste even if he 'started it' (just typing that reminds me how third grade the whole thing is). I think her initial press comment about telling Kanye the lyric was misogynistic was spot on, and she didn't need to say anything else. Making that comment in the speech last night only continued the back-and-forth, and it took attention away from everything else related to her. I think that merits criticism on some level. It doesn't mean she looks worse than Kanye, it just means she took a step back from where she was right when she won (actions speak louder than words).
|
|
matty005
3x Platinum Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 3,418
|
Post by matty005 on Feb 16, 2016 18:42:58 GMT -5
Did Kanye make Taylor Swift famous? No Did the Kanye/Taylor 2009 VMA incident make Taylor Swift more famous than she had been? Yes The way I see it, there is no arguing either of those points. The news today is certainly focusing on Taylor's speech and Kendrick's performance. Taylor is unquestionably a Celebrity and Kendrick is viewed as an Artist. Taylor also has sold a f***-ton of albums, won an a**load of awards and has a lot of industry clout. I'd be the first to jump down Taylor's throat at Kanye's defense but I don't see how any of this BS in the last week reflects poorly on Taylor...except for her wonky performance last night ;). In general it doesn't reflect poorly on Swift, other than some of us think her bragging about it was in poor taste even if he 'started it' (just typing that reminds me how third grade the whole thing is). I think her initial press comment about telling Kanye the lyric was misogynistic was spot on, and she didn't need to say anything else. Making that comment in the speech last night only continued the back-and-forth, and it took attention away from everything else related to her. I think that merits criticism on some level. It doesn't mean she looks worse than Kanye, it just means she took a step back from where she was right when she won (actions speak louder than words). Gonna have to agree to disagree here. I know Taylor is a role model to a lot of young women. I am glad she didn't let someone call her a bitch and saying she should sleep with him without making a comment. If you're fine with people talking bad about you and you being the "bigger person" is all you need to do, that is fine and dandy. I wouldn't want my daughters with that attitude so I applaud Taylor for having a backbone in this situation
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Feb 16, 2016 18:49:33 GMT -5
I can't help but wonder if a man had given that speech (changing the details to suit him, i.e. taking away the part about first woman to win AOTY yada yada) would it be such an issue now? Not to turn it a sexism issue, I just can't help but wonder whether there would be such criticism here? Taylor does seem to get a lot of flack for a lot of stupid shit ranging that I've chalked up to her dropping the 'good girl next door' persona for 'confident smart and social'. People expect her to play the part of a shy girl who keeps her mouth shut. She did nothing wrong by responding to Kanye the way she did.
|
|
DJ General
5x Platinum Member
Dupe
Joined: March 2010
Posts: 5,932
|
Post by DJ General on Feb 16, 2016 19:57:31 GMT -5
The Grammy Awards, unsurprisingly, gave CBS a huge ratings win Monday night. The live telecast currently has a 7.4 rating drew a 7.7 rating in adults 18-49, per time zone-adjusted fast nationals. That’s down from 8.5 last season, when the awards aired in their usual Sunday spot. (Viewer numbers were about the same: 24.95 million vs. 25.3 million last year.) Pretty great ratings. Worst numbers in 7 years No Walking Dead competition. Monday helped the Emmys in 2014. It's possible the live west coast feed hurt them, but that's not an "excuse" since the west coast feed was added with the intent of BOOSTING, not hurting, viewership. Don't get me wrong, the numbers are huge by most TV standards. But not by Grammy standards - and expect to see a lot of press about how they're down (Hits Daily Double and Deadline have already put out such pieces). I think this was a bad weekend to do them on. Too exhausting. Lots of huge movies released - Deadpool...did nearly 3x higher than standard predictions had it. Many people very excited for that. Plus Valentine's Day, plus it was on a Monday. I don't think the numbers are that bad despite them being low -- people are no longer watching live. They are watching clips the next day. As you can see, the viewers are almost the same as last year, just the demo is down. They had the biggest artist in music with Adele, they had stuff for the "teens" with Bieber, they had a ton of highly anticipated tributes, especially with Lady GaGa coming off a raving Super Bowl appearance.. not sure what else could have been done to bring people to watch LIVE. I'm sure a lot of people had it on their DVRs or are watching "illegally" on other websites.
|
|
carrieidol1
Diamond Member
Joined: August 2007
Posts: 12,577
|
Post by carrieidol1 on Feb 16, 2016 20:24:32 GMT -5
The constant mashups and medleys could have something to do with it... For the first year since I can remember I didn't even finish watching it. I was so bored. When I think of the Grammy moments, I think of performances like Jennifer Hudson's "You Pulled Me Through", Whitney Houston's "One Moment In Time" and "I Will Always Love You", Beyonce and Tina Turner's duet, the Michael Jackson tribute by Celine, Smokey, Usher, Jennifer, and Carrie, Michael Jackson's "Man In the Mirror", Kendrick Lamar's performance last night, etc... I think they try way too hard to pull off these "moments" by forcing random ass artists to perform together. The best moments are the ones that aren't planned as "moments". Let singers sing their songs how they want; don't force them to collaborate with random people and mash up their songs. Sometimes it works, and occasionally it's alright. But there were more mashups and medleys last night than single/solo performances by a lot! It just didn't work for me... I had almost no interest in any of these "moments", and I know I'm not alone on this. Let them sing their nominated songs, or their current singles. Let the artists control what they perform and who they perform with. It's the fans of the artists who are tuning in, after all!
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,550
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 16, 2016 20:27:58 GMT -5
In general it doesn't reflect poorly on Swift, other than some of us think her bragging about it was in poor taste even if he 'started it' (just typing that reminds me how third grade the whole thing is). I think her initial press comment about telling Kanye the lyric was misogynistic was spot on, and she didn't need to say anything else. Making that comment in the speech last night only continued the back-and-forth, and it took attention away from everything else related to her. I think that merits criticism on some level. It doesn't mean she looks worse than Kanye, it just means she took a step back from where she was right when she won (actions speak louder than words). Gonna have to agree to disagree here. I know Taylor is a role model to a lot of young women. I am glad she didn't let someone call her a bitch and saying she should sleep with him without making a comment. If you're fine with people talking bad about you and you being the "bigger person" is all you need to do, that is fine and dandy. I wouldn't want my daughters with that attitude so I applaud Taylor for having a backbone in this situation Taylor did make a comment; she released that statement saying she told Kanye it was misogynistic. I said in my previous reply that I thought that was a spot on response. I then said I think she should have just left it there instead of continuing to engage in the back-and-forth.
|
|
Colton
Platinum Member
Banned
Joined: September 2015
Posts: 1,461
|
Post by Colton on Feb 16, 2016 20:35:18 GMT -5
The mashups were so unnecessary
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Feb 16, 2016 20:39:51 GMT -5
I then said I think she should have just left it there instead of continuing to engage in the back-and-forth. It is good advice when you think about it.
|
|
magik
Gold Member
Joined: November 2015
Posts: 506
|
Post by magik on Feb 16, 2016 21:56:26 GMT -5
LMAO. Just goes to show how truly irrelevant these awards are. That album wasn't even recognized as the best album BACK THEN and time has been even more unkind to it. Award shows get it wrong 90% of the time and that's being generous, so it's best to take it all with a grain of salt. Well it was probably the safest choice that year, sure, but "Hello," "All Night Long," and "Stuck On You" are still remembered fairly well. It's not like Lionel Richie and the songs from the album were never heard from again. Something like Back on the Block is a much worse winner. All of those albums nominated that year were weak. Back on the Block was the most deserving winner of that category ("Secret Garden" alone deserved a Grammy), even if it wasn't the best overall album of that year.
|
|
cjay
3x Platinum Member
Joined: October 2006
Posts: 3,046
|
Post by cjay on Feb 16, 2016 22:23:03 GMT -5
Ok people. Get prepared NOW. Adele Is taking home AOTY next year.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,550
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 16, 2016 22:53:01 GMT -5
Well it was probably the safest choice that year, sure, but "Hello," "All Night Long," and "Stuck On You" are still remembered fairly well. It's not like Lionel Richie and the songs from the album were never heard from again. Something like Back on the Block is a much worse winner. All of those albums nominated that year were weak. Back on the Block was the most deserving winner of that category ("Secret Garden" alone deserved a Grammy), even if it wasn't the best overall album of that year. I agree the category was very weak that year, but Mariah's debut would have been a solid choice among that group. It sold really well, and "Vision of Love" is a legit classic. People certainly remember that album more than BOTB and it would seem respectable even now had it won. I'm not saying it would be an all-time winner, but at this point BOTB is long forgotten and basically an embarrassing winner. It's kind of odd how people like Alicia Keys, Lauryn Hill, and Norah Jones won big awards for their debut album/song but not Mariah. I guess that trend didn't start until Sheryl Crow won Best New Artist and Record of the Year in the same year.
|
|
Wavey✨️
Moderator
Look...
Positive Vibes🙏🏾❤
Joined: August 2006
Posts: 42,851
Pronouns: He/Him
Staff
|
Post by Wavey✨️ on Feb 16, 2016 23:36:57 GMT -5
I'm here for Tori's face.
|
|
DJ General
5x Platinum Member
Dupe
Joined: March 2010
Posts: 5,932
|
Post by DJ General on Feb 16, 2016 23:44:42 GMT -5
Why are people hating on the mash ups? Tori and James were fantastic together. and Sam and Carrie in thought were great minus some vocal issues but the songs worked really well together
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,550
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 17, 2016 10:36:42 GMT -5
I think one thing that would help the show is tightening up the voting process. It's ridiculous how old a lot of the nominated music is, and streamlining the voting would help. I know they try to balance that by having people like Adele perform despite not being nominated, but why is there over 4 months between the end of eligibility and when the awards take place?!?! Adele's "Hello" could sweep next year despite being released before nominations for this year's awards were even announced. The show just took place, and yet there are only 7 months left in the eligibility year. That's crazy.
The Oscars feel more relevant because at least the movies being rewarded are somewhat recent if not very recent.
|
|
carrieidol1
Diamond Member
Joined: August 2007
Posts: 12,577
|
Post by carrieidol1 on Feb 17, 2016 10:42:17 GMT -5
Why are people hating on the mash ups? Tori and James were fantastic together. and Sam and Carrie in thought were great minus some vocal issues but the songs worked really well together Those few worked... But overall I rather see artist(s) sing their own songs. I don't hate mashups at all, I just think a show with pretty much only mashups gets a little redundant...
|
|
Caviar
Diamond Member
Queen X
Joined: October 2003
Posts: 30,917
My Charts
Pronouns: He/his
|
Post by Caviar on Feb 17, 2016 10:48:28 GMT -5
I think one thing that would help the show is tightening up the voting process. It's ridiculous how old a lot of the nominated music is, and streamlining the voting would help. I know they try to balance that by having people like Adele perform despite not being nominated, but why is there over 4 months between the end of eligibility and when the awards take place?!?! Adele's "Hello" could sweep next year despite being released before nominations for this year's awards were even announced. The show just took place, and yet there are only 7 months left in the eligibility year. That's crazy. The Oscars feel more relevant because at least the movies being rewarded are somewhat recent if not very recent. I agree with this but the Grammys have 78 categories and a lot of branches than the Oscars so the process of streamlining would be a more difficult task.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,550
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 17, 2016 11:08:41 GMT -5
I think one thing that would help the show is tightening up the voting process. It's ridiculous how old a lot of the nominated music is, and streamlining the voting would help. I know they try to balance that by having people like Adele perform despite not being nominated, but why is there over 4 months between the end of eligibility and when the awards take place?!?! Adele's "Hello" could sweep next year despite being released before nominations for this year's awards were even announced. The show just took place, and yet there are only 7 months left in the eligibility year. That's crazy. The Oscars feel more relevant because at least the movies being rewarded are somewhat recent if not very recent. I agree with this but the Grammys have 78 categories and a lot of branches than the Oscars so the process of streamlining would be a more difficult task. I don't expect the process to be as short as it is for the Oscars, but surely it can be shortened from 4+ months? More so, I get the lag between the end of eligibility and the nominations, but why is there then 2+ months between nominations and the awards? Surely that could be condensed 1 month.
|
|
Caviar
Diamond Member
Queen X
Joined: October 2003
Posts: 30,917
My Charts
Pronouns: He/his
|
Post by Caviar on Feb 17, 2016 11:12:56 GMT -5
Yeah I see what you're saying now. Aren't the final ballots due like Jan. 15th?
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,550
|
Post by jenglisbe on Feb 17, 2016 11:24:54 GMT -5
Some updated career totals per the Grammys site: Tony Bennett - 17 (though he said 18 in his speech, I believe) Taylor Swift - 10 Kendrick Lamar - 7 Bruno Mars - 4
|
|
Libra
Diamond Member
The One Who Knows Where All the Bodies Are Buried
:)
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 14,376
My Charts
|
Post by Libra on Feb 17, 2016 12:25:02 GMT -5
I'd rather be a shitlord and have her be around for a long time than lose her at a young age thanks to the diabetes. Time for you to leave, child. I think it's time for you to leave now, too. Again.
|
|
|
Post by when the pawn... on Feb 17, 2016 12:37:31 GMT -5
I personally think they should be handing out 10-12 awards (if not a couple more) on the telecast AND the show should only be 3 hours. There were so many tributes and mashups that were unnecessary. They should be thinking about performances that will be *exciting* - in my opinion, Hamilton, Gaga and Kendrick were great examples of that. I know James Bay, Tori Kelly, Ellie Goulding, Andra Day, Carrie Underwood, Sam Hunt, Pitbull were all nominees, and most of them are talented, but who was all that inspired by their performances? I love Miguel and think he did a great job but what was the point of having him sing for like a minute? I love Stevie Wonder but maybe lets go a few years before they have him perform with a *VERY* random young act that makes no sense. I like the concept of the mashups, sometimes greatness ensues but it's rare. Focus on exciting, relevant, unique performers. That's why I think the inclusion of Bjork, Courtney Barnett, D'Angelo, Tame Impala, etc would have been great. How amazing would an FKA Twigs performance be or Chance the Rapper/Social Experiment doing " Sunday Candy"? The Grammys are not the AMAs nor the VMAs nor the Billoard Awards and I wish they would step up and put more focus on the best music of the year, rather than scrambling to balance massive ratings with their old-straight-white-guy sensibilities. IMO, the ratings will come with a great show. Just my opinion. I'd like to add that I'm not advocating for no pop acts on the Grammys. Lady Gaga, Beyonce, Bruno Mars, Adele are shining examples of huge ratings-draws that consistently deliver. I know Taylor Swift is as big as it gets so I'll add her as well, even though her pop-oriented performances still make me cringe. Pink, Kelly Clarkson too and Rihanna as of late. One more thought - electronic music is a big deal. So why did The Grammys state that Bieber/Diplo/Skrillex was going to be their televised nod to the genre and then "Where Are U Now" featured no electronic elements? Why not keep the spirit of the song and add an awesome visual element, representing the essence of (very popular) live EDM shows? Why not get Jamie XX and Young Thug to do "I Know There's Gonna Be (Good Times)" to represent an excellent electronic/hip-hop fusion?
|
|