2020 Grammy Awards

[Choco]

Yeah she included far too many details on her tea for it to be all lies. I believe her.

Was it H.E.R.? To be honest while I like her she didn't get enough buzz this year to do even better than last year on the general field.

[upsidedown]

Yeah I was surprised HER got more nominations... thought last year was "her" year... she's done not much since last year

[shayonce]

Q: You’re 76 and have been running the show for 40 years. Why are you still doing it? What drives you to come back every year?
A: I love the music. The joy for me is showing up. There’s still enough music that I thrive on. That’s it. Crafting the show is always a challenge, but honestly it’s the music. H.E.R. has this new song that she did with us a few months ago, but it wasn’t ready for performance yet, and we’ve helped her turn it into something that is spectacular and I think is going to change your life on Sunday night, I really do. So it’s those kinds of things.
- Ken Ehrlich (Grammy producer)

www.yahoo.com/entertainment/behind-scenes-61st-grammys-man-210853006.html

the song is Hard Place which she performed in 2019 Grammy.
she was indeed favored by grammy, now that song nominated for both SOTY/ROTY and also AOTY for album that don't even have reviews.

[jenglisbe]

The “boys club” thing is interesting since Adele, Norah Jones, etc have managed to sweep, and Taylor Swift, Lauryn Hill, etc have won big awards. The issue has been more in not recognizing R&B and hip-hop, which happens more in the final voting when all vote than it does in the nominations. Weird.

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

Jan 22, 2020 9:31:53 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

The “boys club” thing is interesting since Adele, Norah Jones, etc have managed to sweep, and Taylor Swift, Lauryn Hill, etc have won big awards. The issue has been more in not recognizing R&B and hip-hop, which happens more in the final voting when all vote than it does in the nominations. Weird.

Just because women have won awards and have had sweeping years, doesn’t make the boys club suggestion untrue.

[jenglisbe]

Jan 22, 2020 9:41:26 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

Jan 22, 2020 9:31:53 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

The “boys club” thing is interesting since Adele, Norah Jones, etc have managed to sweep, and Taylor Swift, Lauryn Hill, etc have won big awards. The issue has been more in not recognizing R&B and hip-hop, which happens more in the final voting when all vote than it does in the nominations. Weird.

Just because women have won awards and have had sweeping years, doesn’t make the boys club suggestion untrue.

My point being I don’t see any evidence women have been consistently hurt or marginalized by the committee.

[kanimal]

Jan 22, 2020 9:50:09 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Jan 22, 2020 9:41:26 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

Just because women have won awards and have had sweeping years, doesn’t make the boys club suggestion untrue.

My point being I don’t see any evidence women have been consistently hurt or marginalized by the committee.

One obvious anecdotal example, and it's actually noted in the claim, is Lorde not being offered a solo performance slot the year she was up for Album of the Year. The other (male) nominees all were. And it's not like Lorde is some no-name artist; she's an international star and a past "Big Four" Grammy winner.

That arguably matters more than whether women are winning awards ... since it speaks to a potential gender bias at the highest possible level.

Plus, remember that the academy isn't just about the awards show anyway - it plays a vital role in the furthering of music within our society. So if there's an absence of female representation - or a feeling of hostility toward women within the culture of the organization - it has meaningful consequences.

[annoymous1]

Jan 14, 2020 23:31:53 GMT -5 think pink. said:

the industry is still trying to make her happen

http://instagr.am/p/B7U4ocEpfXd

3 times a charm?

[jenglisbe]

Jan 22, 2020 10:09:40 GMT -5 kanimal said:

Jan 22, 2020 9:50:09 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

My point being I don’t see any evidence women have been consistently hurt or marginalized by the committee.

One obvious anecdotal example, and it's actually noted in the claim, is Lorde not being offered a solo performance slot the year she was up for Album of the Year. The other (male) nominees all were. And it's not like Lorde is some no-name artist; she's an international star and a past "Big Four" Grammy winner.

That arguably matters more than whether women are winning awards ... since it speaks to a potential gender bias at the highest possible level.

Plus, remember that the academy isn't just about the awards show anyway - it plays a vital role in the furthering of music within our society. So if there's an absence of female representation - or a feeling of hostility toward women within the culture of the organization - it has meaningful consequences.

Lorde even being nominated for AOTY shows the committee probably moved her up from a low spot in the top 20, though, considering she didn’t get any other noms. So, without the corrupt committee she doesn’t even get nominated (and also doesn’t perform).

[kanimal]

Jan 22, 2020 10:18:28 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Jan 22, 2020 10:09:40 GMT -5 kanimal said:

One obvious anecdotal example, and it's actually noted in the claim, is Lorde not being offered a solo performance slot the year she was up for Album of the Year. The other (male) nominees all were. And it's not like Lorde is some no-name artist; she's an international star and a past "Big Four" Grammy winner.

That arguably matters more than whether women are winning awards ... since it speaks to a potential gender bias at the highest possible level.

Plus, remember that the academy isn't just about the awards show anyway - it plays a vital role in the furthering of music within our society. So if there's an absence of female representation - or a feeling of hostility toward women within the culture of the organization - it has meaningful consequences.

Lorde even being nominated for AOTY shows the committee probably moved her up from a low spot in the top 20, though, considering she didn’t get any other noms. So, without the corrupt committee she doesn’t even get nominated (and also doesn’t perform).

But she WAS nominated ... which means that a conscious decision was made not to offer her (the lone female nominee) a performance slot. That's at least cause for questioning. And, remember, the higher-ups who influence (if not outright demand) performance slots are the ones keeping the committee in place, so they obviously stand behind it. From their perspective, she thus has to be considered every bit the deserving nominee and performer -- even if she didn't rank well in the initial vote.

Plus, your point about her potentially only getting in due to the committee creates an infinite logical circle, because you could just as easily argue that her omission from other categories (as well as other categories during the Pure Heroine era when she was one of the biggest music names on the planet) is a product of discrimination.

The same goes for any anecdotal look at the nominees. "Some women got nominated" doesn't mean "no deserving women were unfairly omitted." Just as "there are high-paid women CEOs" doesn't mean "women don't face unfair obstacles in the corporate world."

And even if you want to discredit this particular anecdote, all it really does is speak to the limited impact of anecdotes. Which would also apply to your "oh, well these women won before" point. We should be looking at the internal facts - are women adequately represented in the academy membership, is the culture one of equality, is there no intentional or unintentional feeling of a "boys club," is there no sexual or gender-based harassment.

I'm not necessarily willing to just take Dugan's claims at face. I just think we need data from the internal workplace/academy culture, not just a list of award winners and nominees, to assess their merit.

[jenglisbe]

Jan 22, 2020 10:33:11 GMT -5 kanimal said:

Jan 22, 2020 10:18:28 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Lorde even being nominated for AOTY shows the committee probably moved her up from a low spot in the top 20, though, considering she didn’t get any other noms. So, without the corrupt committee she doesn’t even get nominated (and also doesn’t perform).

But she WAS nominated ... which means that a conscious decision was made not to offer her (the lone female nominee) a performance slot. That's at least cause for questioning. And, remember, the higher-ups who influence (if not outright demand) performance slots are the ones keeping the committee in place, so they obviously stand behind it. From their perspective, she thus has to be considered every bit the deserving nominee and performer -- even if she didn't rank well in the initial vote.

Plus, your point about her potentially only getting in due to the committee creates an infinite logical circle, because you could just as easily argue that her omission from other categories (as well as other categories during the Pure Heroine era when she was one of the biggest music names on the planet) is a product of discrimination.

The same goes for any anecdotal look at the nominees. "Some women got nominated" doesn't mean "no deserving women were unfairly omitted."

And even if you want to discredit this particular anecdote, all it really does is speak to the limited impact of anecdotes. Which would also apply to your "oh, well these women won before" point. We should be looking at the internal facts - are women adequately represented, is the culture one of equality, is there no "boys club," is there no sexual or gender-based harassment.

I'm not necessarily willing to just take Dugan's claims at face. I just think we need data from the internal workplace/academy culture, not just a list of award winners and nominees, to assess their merit.

And then you can point to the committee clearly snubbing the male Ed Sheehan in that very same year Lorde got in AOTY...I’m happy Lorde got in over him, but it’s hard to argue sexism was at play in regards to Lorde when the committee replaced a popular male nominee with her.

[kanimal]

Jan 22, 2020 10:36:04 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Jan 22, 2020 10:33:11 GMT -5 kanimal said:

But she WAS nominated ... which means that a conscious decision was made not to offer her (the lone female nominee) a performance slot. That's at least cause for questioning. And, remember, the higher-ups who influence (if not outright demand) performance slots are the ones keeping the committee in place, so they obviously stand behind it. From their perspective, she thus has to be considered every bit the deserving nominee and performer -- even if she didn't rank well in the initial vote.

Plus, your point about her potentially only getting in due to the committee creates an infinite logical circle, because you could just as easily argue that her omission from other categories (as well as other categories during the Pure Heroine era when she was one of the biggest music names on the planet) is a product of discrimination.

The same goes for any anecdotal look at the nominees. "Some women got nominated" doesn't mean "no deserving women were unfairly omitted."

And even if you want to discredit this particular anecdote, all it really does is speak to the limited impact of anecdotes. Which would also apply to your "oh, well these women won before" point. We should be looking at the internal facts - are women adequately represented, is the culture one of equality, is there no "boys club," is there no sexual or gender-based harassment.

I'm not necessarily willing to just take Dugan's claims at face. I just think we need data from the internal workplace/academy culture, not just a list of award winners and nominees, to assess their merit.

And then you can point to the committee clearly snubbing the male Ed Sheehan in that very same year Lorde got in AOTY...I’m happy Lorde got in over him, but it’s hard to argue sexism was at play in regards to Lorde when the committee replaced a popular male nominee with her.

I refuse to believe you can't process the idea that "women getting awards" and "the academy membership does not have adequate female representation / tolerates an internal 'boys club' culture" are not mutually exclusive concepts.

[dann]

[shayonce]

also the boys club is not simply about how man women won in general. lol
it was about representation in academy's board member to voting member and through whole organization.

"as of 2018 April, women made up only 20% of Voting member."

"Task Force concluded that the biases affecting women, people of color and LGBTQ creators in the music business are deeply ingrained."


"2015~2018 national governance committee 71% male / 29% female
2015~2017 nomination review committes 74% male / 26% female"

"2012~2019 Board member 68% male, 69% Caucasian"

[Me. I Am l!nk!nfan815...]

Jan 22, 2020 0:52:32 GMT -5 Lumi said:

How much messier can this sh!t get?

@ how many pianos will Alicia Keys have to play at once to change the subject

[#LisaRinna]

Jan 21, 2020 18:38:16 GMT -5 @antigonerising said:

FEASTING ON THIS TEA RN.

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

Jan 22, 2020 9:50:09 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Jan 22, 2020 9:41:26 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

Just because women have won awards and have had sweeping years, doesn’t make the boys club suggestion untrue.

My point being I don’t see any evidence women have been consistently hurt or marginalized by the committee.

Even in the production, engineering and songwriting categories? Or do we just mean the broadcast?

[ddlz]

Jan 22, 2020 8:16:43 GMT -5 shayonce said:

Q: You’re 76 and have been running the show for 40 years. Why are you still doing it? What drives you to come back every year?
A: I love the music. The joy for me is showing up. There’s still enough music that I thrive on. That’s it. Crafting the show is always a challenge, but honestly it’s the music. H.E.R. has this new song that she did with us a few months ago, but it wasn’t ready for performance yet, and we’ve helped her turn it into something that is spectacular and I think is going to change your life on Sunday night, I really do. So it’s those kinds of things.
- Ken Ehrlich (Grammy producer)

www.yahoo.com/entertainment/behind-scenes-61st-grammys-man-210853006.html

the song is Hard Place which she performed in 2019 Grammy.
she was indeed favored by grammy, now that song nominated for both SOTY/ROTY and also AOTY for album that don't even have reviews.

10 nominations (including two for AOTY) and 2 wins, all in the span of two years, based off of mediocre EPs that barely anyone reviewed, let alone bought. She hasn't even released a real album yet. You can't make this shit up.

I don't know why any self-respecting artist would want to be part of this ridiculously corrupt shit-show at this point. 

[PGriffin]

I'm so lost on this....can someone give me the summary. I know that one lady was fired/left but what has been going on? This year seems so lackluster.

[Mike]

[jenglisbe]

Jan 22, 2020 10:40:29 GMT -5 kanimal said:

Jan 22, 2020 10:36:04 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

And then you can point to the committee clearly snubbing the male Ed Sheehan in that very same year Lorde got in AOTY...I’m happy Lorde got in over him, but it’s hard to argue sexism was at play in regards to Lorde when the committee replaced a popular male nominee with her.

I refuse to believe you can't process the idea that "women getting awards" and "the academy membership does not have adequate female representation / tolerates an internal 'boys club' culture" are not mutually exclusive concepts.

I was speaking about how the boys club manifests itself in terms of the nominations. I do think membership and boards should be looked at, just like with the Oscars. You also have to expand that, though. The membership leans very male, but does the music industry lean very male? I don’t know, but if, say, 70% of musicians and producers are male, then the membership being 69% isn’t a NARAS problem, it’s an industry problem.

[jenglisbe]

Jan 22, 2020 11:10:38 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

Jan 22, 2020 9:50:09 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

My point being I don’t see any evidence women have been consistently hurt or marginalized by the committee.

Even in the production, engineering and songwriting categories? Or do we just mean the broadcast?

I mean in the nominations for general categories. The committee for production is different, for example, no? There are clearly issues with that committee, but that’s an extension of an industry problem and the lack of female producers in general.

[kimberly]

Jan 22, 2020 12:07:47 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Jan 22, 2020 10:40:29 GMT -5 kanimal said:

I refuse to believe you can't process the idea that "women getting awards" and "the academy membership does not have adequate female representation / tolerates an internal 'boys club' culture" are not mutually exclusive concepts.

I was speaking about how the boys club manifests itself in terms of the nominations. I do think membership and boards should be looked at, just like with the Oscars. You also have to expand that, though. The membership leans very male, but does the music industry lean very male? I don’t know, but if, say, 70% of musicians and producers are male, then the membership being 69% isn’t a NARAS problem, it’s an industry problem.

boy is it you or the privilege talking???

ever wondered if the reason for only 2% of producers being women... could be... the gatekeeping men? 

yes, Adele swept the general categories twice, she's literally never lost a grammy. that still doesn't make up for Beck winning over Beyoncé, Rihanna losing 8 nominations and SZA losing 5 nominations, or Emily Lazar becoming the first woman EVER to be nominated Best Engineered Album... in 20-f*cking-16 (and she became the first to win in 2019!)?

[jenglisbe]

Jan 22, 2020 12:41:26 GMT -5 kimberly said:

Jan 22, 2020 12:07:47 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

I was speaking about how the boys club manifests itself in terms of the nominations. I do think membership and boards should be looked at, just like with the Oscars. You also have to expand that, though. The membership leans very male, but does the music industry lean very male? I don’t know, but if, say, 70% of musicians and producers are male, then the membership being 69% isn’t a NARAS problem, it’s an industry problem.

boy is it you or the privilege talking???

ever wondered if the reason for only 2% of producers being women... could be... the gatekeeping men? 

yes, Adele swept the general categories twice, she's literally never lost a grammy. that still doesn't make up for Beck winning over Beyoncé, Rihanna losing 8 nominations and SZA losing 5 nominations, or Emily Lazar becoming the first woman EVER to be nominated Best Engineered Album... in 20-f*cking-16 (and she became the first to win in 2019!)?

Perhaps your outrage is clouding your reading. I didn’t say the issue was acceptable, I’m saying you have to find the root of the issue in order to address it.

[kimberly]

Jan 22, 2020 12:46:15 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Jan 22, 2020 12:41:26 GMT -5 kimberly said:

boy is it you or the privilege talking???

ever wondered if the reason for only 2% of producers being women... could be... the gatekeeping men? 

yes, Adele swept the general categories twice, she's literally never lost a grammy. that still doesn't make up for Beck winning over Beyoncé, Rihanna losing 8 nominations and SZA losing 5 nominations, or Emily Lazar becoming the first woman EVER to be nominated Best Engineered Album... in 20-f*cking-16 (and she became the first to win in 2019!)?

Perhaps your outrage is clouding your reading. I didn’t say the issue was acceptable, I’m saying you have to find the root of the issue in order to address it.

Haha. No it's crystal clear. This is not the type of issue to go and address bottom up. You can't just suddenly change who's in the industry. But if you highlight talented women, give them airtime, let Lorde have a performance slot or let Ariana Grande play whatever she wants to play, you'll set an example and inspire people. No, I'm not saying they should get special treatment because they are women. I'm saying the academy should stop acting like women can't be real artists. 

It is very confusing to me that you don't see how the committee has been a "boys club" and how that puts women in a disadvantaged position. 

"Lorde even being nominated for AOTY shows the committee probably moved her up from a low spot in the top 20, though, considering she didn’t get any other noms. So, without the corrupt committee she doesn’t even get nominated (and also doesn’t perform)."

Way to undermine a woman's success! How can you even jump to the conclusion that she wouldn't have been nominated if it weren't for the corrupt committee? I am sure we would have less Beck and more women nominated if the committee was actually equally representative of different communities, including the gays, women, and poc. 

[jenglisbe]

Jan 22, 2020 13:04:24 GMT -5 kimberly said:

Jan 22, 2020 12:46:15 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Perhaps your outrage is clouding your reading. I didn’t say the issue was acceptable, I’m saying you have to find the root of the issue in order to address it.

Haha. No it's crystal clear. This is not the type of issue to go and address bottom up. You can't just suddenly change who's in the industry. But if you highlight talented women, give them airtime, let Lorde have a performance slot or let Ariana Grande play whatever she wants to play, you'll set an example and inspire people. No, I'm not saying they should get special treatment because they are women. I'm saying the academy should stop acting like women can't be real artists. 

It is very confusing to me that you don't see how the committee has been a "boys club" and how that puts women in a disadvantaged position. 

"Lorde even being nominated for AOTY shows the committee probably moved her up from a low spot in the top 20, though, considering she didn’t get any other noms. So, without the corrupt committee she doesn’t even get nominated (and also doesn’t perform)."

Way to undermine a woman's success! How can you even jump to the conclusion that she wouldn't have been nominated if it weren't for the corrupt committee? I am sure we would have less Beck and more women nominated if the committee was actually equally representative of different communities, including the gays, women, and poc. 

I can say that about Lorde because she didn’t get nominated elsewhere. Why would she be top 5 overall but not even top 5 in her genre? I’d also need proof Lorde was excluded from performing because she’s female to call it sexism. And actually I think she was asked to perform, just not her own music or something?

You mentioned there’d be more women nominated if not for the committee. 5 of the 8 nominees for AOTY this year are women. 5 of the 8 AOTY nominees last year were women as well. 5 of the 8 nominees for New Artist this year are solo women. 6 of the 8 nominees for BNA last year were female acts. How many women in these categories is your ideal?

[kimberly]

Jan 22, 2020 13:18:23 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Jan 22, 2020 13:04:24 GMT -5 kimberly said:

Haha. No it's crystal clear. This is not the type of issue to go and address bottom up. You can't just suddenly change who's in the industry. But if you highlight talented women, give them airtime, let Lorde have a performance slot or let Ariana Grande play whatever she wants to play, you'll set an example and inspire people. No, I'm not saying they should get special treatment because they are women. I'm saying the academy should stop acting like women can't be real artists. 

It is very confusing to me that you don't see how the committee has been a "boys club" and how that puts women in a disadvantaged position. 

"Lorde even being nominated for AOTY shows the committee probably moved her up from a low spot in the top 20, though, considering she didn’t get any other noms. So, without the corrupt committee she doesn’t even get nominated (and also doesn’t perform)."

Way to undermine a woman's success! How can you even jump to the conclusion that she wouldn't have been nominated if it weren't for the corrupt committee? I am sure we would have less Beck and more women nominated if the committee was actually equally representative of different communities, including the gays, women, and poc. 

I can say that about Lorde because she didn’t get nominated elsewhere. Why would she be top 5 overall but not even top 5 in her genre? I’d also need proof Lorde was excluded from performing because she’s female to call it sexism. And actually I think she was asked to perform, just not her own music or something?

this bit tells me enough about your way of thinking to not want to carry on with this conversation. have a mediocre day

[cjay]

It should just be policy that all AOTY nominees will be offered a 3 min slot (at least) to perform material from their nominated album.

[Deleted]

Jan 22, 2020 9:31:53 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

The “boys club” thing is interesting since Adele, Norah Jones, etc have managed to sweep, and Taylor Swift, Lauryn Hill, etc have won big awards. The issue has been more in not recognizing R&B and hip-hop, which happens more in the final voting when all vote than it does in the nominations. Weird.

That's not weird at all. Adele, Norah Jones, and Taylor Swift were all 'safe,' acceptable choices who met the status quo. Lauryn, the last black woman to win the award, was literally over two decades ago but even if I pretend that example isn't hella outdated, her image was nonthreatening to older voters and very much fell in line with the respectability politics of the day (not to say she was purposely trying to play that game). Dixie Chicks are another group of ladies off the top of my head who likely did well because their image lined up perfectly with the academy's political POV at the time.

Genre biases muddy this because we know urban and country music are often left out in the cold, but the "boys' club" matters because it is an indication of men dictating what women are 'allowed' to be, constraints that men don't face. This has always been at the heart of modern-day misogyny. There was a time when we wouldn't be allowed in the room at all unless it was to serve someone his dinner, so now we keep getting told we should be happy that someone let us sit down at the table instead of recognizing how fucking patronizing it is to give someone a seat without a plate. We still go home hungry.

Being thrown a token nomination and then pointedly excluded from the festivities (first by only being invited to be part of a tribute, then not offered a spot at all after declining the tribute moment) is not inclusion and I don't know why you keep trying to insist that it is. If it were a male hip-hop artist in Lorde's shoes I have a feeling you could immediately comprehend why that was an issue.

I will also point out that the reason the '18th out of 20' person was spotlighted wasn't simply because they were so low on the list, it was because that person had representation in the room so strong that the artist got a seat on the committee. Someone with that much clout is almost surely going to finagle a performance slot as well. Lorde's treatment clearly signals a different (lack of) relationship with the committee. Most likely, she was only thrown in either as a bargaining chip while trying to finagle votes for someone else or as an easy way to avoid an all-male AOTY field without posing a real threat, and then was snubbed from the stage precisely because the same people who put her in that category didn't really want to put her there. Probably should have been Ed in her spot based on votes, which is problematic for its own multitude of reasons but at least in that case the blame could be placed squarely on the voters' shoulders rather than an interfering committee.

[Caviar]

Ex-Grammy Chief Neil Portnow Responds to Rape Allegations


VARIETY
variety.com/2020/music/news/ex-grammy-chief-neil-portnow-rape-recording-academy-1203475674/

The most explosive of many allegations in ousted Recording Academy Deborah Dugan’s complaint against the organization Tuesday was a claim that her predecessor, Neil Portnow, had been accused of raping a “foreign” singer who was a member of the Academy, and that Academy executives were aware of it at the time of Dugan’s hiring.

On Wednesday morning, Portnow responded to the allegations with the following statement:

“This document is filled with inaccurate, false and outrageous and terribly hurtful claims against me,” he wrote. “Here is what is true:


“The allegations of rape are ludicrous, and untrue. The suggestion that there was is disseminating a lie. The baseless complaint about my conduct referenced in the EEOC filing was immediately brought to the attention of the Board of Director’s Executive Committee. An in-depth independent investigation by experienced and highly regarded lawyers was conducted and I was completely exonerated. There was no basis for the allegations and once again I deny them unequivocally.”

In that statement, he acknowledges the existence of the claim and the investigation of it, which had not previously been publicly stated.

He also denied that he had demanded a $750,000 consulting job with the Academy after stepped down from his post last summer (and was succeeded by Dugan), although the complaint does not state that he was the one who requested it.

“I fulfilled the terms and responsibilities of my contract during my 17 years as President and ultimately Chief Executive Officer. Consistent with my pledge to ensure that there would be the appropriate amount of time for the Academy to organize and execute an efficient and transparent transition, I determined far in advance of the GRAMMY telecast in 2018 that I would not seek a further extension of my contract scheduled to end July 31, 2019. I informed the then Board Chair and Executive Committee of my decision. At no time did I ever demand a $750,000 consulting fee.”

Portnow also referenced his awkward 2018 comment to a Variety reporter after the 2018 Grammys that female artists and executives needed to “step up” in order to advance in the industry, and the subsequent formation of a Task Force for diversity at the Academy.

“After making the ‘step up’ comment during the 2018 telecast, for which I have apologized and deeply regret the offense caused, and understanding the power of listening and lessons learned, I took action. I proposed, and the Academy created an independent Task Force to review the state of diversity & inclusion across the organization. After presenting the Task Force plan and proposed study of the organization to the board, the group was created to implement change. Task Force Chair Tina Tchen made a presentation to the full Board during a May 2019 meeting.

“The repetition of these falsehoods against me, and others referenced within the EEOC filing are a diversionary tactic and will not convert them to truth. I will vigorously defend all false claims made against me in this document.

“I would like to wish all the 2020 nominees and those in our creative community well and sincerely hope that they will celebrate their art and accomplishments this weekend at the GRAMMY Awards telecast and during the many GRAMMY Week events ahead.”