Author Topic: Grammys Have Time for Hillary Clinton, But Not Lorde, To Perform?  (Read 452 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline EasyAce

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,385
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Blue, 2012-2020---my big, gentle friend.
Virtue signaling is tricky business, especially for an entertainment world trying to be holier-than-thou.
By Nick Gillespie
http://reason.com/blog/2018/01/29/grammys-have-time-for-hillary-clinton-bu/print

Quote
As the Drudge Report wants you to know in ALL CAPS, last night's Grammy awards telecast was a "crash and burn" affair, and possibly the "lowest rated" ever. Deadline Hollywood's Dominic Patten writes,

With a 12.7/21 in metered market ratings, the Recording Academy's big hootenanny was also way down from the early numbers for the LA-based February 13, 2017 59th annual show. By way down, I mean a just over 20% decline from last year to what looks to be an all-time low for the ceremony.

Right-wingers already have a ready explanation for this: the politicization of allegedly once-pure "entertainment" events.

That's the reason why movies flop, why the NFL's audience is shrinking, you name it. It's that jes' plain folks are sick and tired of having their safe spaces invaded by politics. Forget larger trends or, in the case of Grammys, savvy counter-programming by other networks. AMC's mega-hit franchise The Walking Dead had a mid-season debut last night and even network standards such as Shark Tank and Family Guy aired new episodes.

All of which makes sense given that nobody really cares about the Grammys, do they? . . . Let's assume that the Grammys, like the Olympics, the Oscars, the NFL, and other 20th-century televised institutions, no longer command attention and interest the way they used to. It's less because of politicization and more simply because audiences have more and more freedom to go elsewhere . . . Which isn't to say that the Grammys didn't go out of its way to bother the majority of Americans who didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. For a show that didn't make time for popular (and political!) artist Lorde to perform despite her being up for the prestigious "album of the year" award, the Grammys still found time to run an explicitly anti–Donald Trump sketch featuring Hillary Clinton reading from Michael Wolff's Fire and Fury. Because when you've got a roomful of musical talent, what you really want to see is a failed politician who spent a good amount of her time in power railing against pop culture.
(Speaking personally, what mattered most to me, in terms of the awards themselves was that, for once, Grammy justice was done, when Taj Mahal and Keb' Mo' won the award for best contemporary blues album, for their collaboration TajMo. On the other hand, the Rolling Stones' ho-hum Blue and Lonesome won the award for best traditional blues album, which should tell you among other things that nobody with any substantial say in the voting was really listening to Eric Bibb's Migration Blues or Elvin Bishop's Elvin Bishop's Big Fun Trio. But the point about no time for Lorde and all the time on earth for Hilarious Rodent Clinton is only too well taken.---EA.)


"The question of who is right is a small one, indeed, beside the question of what is right."---Albert Jay Nock.

Fake news---news you don't like or don't want to hear.

Offline Sanguine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,986
  • Gender: Female
  • Ex-member
Re: Grammys Have Time for Hillary Clinton, But Not Lorde, To Perform?
« Reply #1 on: January 29, 2018, 06:06:17 pm »
Virtue signaling is tricky business, especially for an entertainment world trying to be holier-than-thou.
By Nick Gillespie
http://reason.com/blog/2018/01/29/grammys-have-time-for-hillary-clinton-bu/print
(Speaking personally, what mattered most to me, in terms of the awards themselves was that, for once, Grammy justice was done, when Taj Mahal and Keb' Mo' won the award for best contemporary blues album, for their collaboration TajMo.[/b] On the other hand, the Rolling Stones' ho-hum Blue and Lonesome won the award for best traditional blues album, which should tell you among other things that nobody with any substantial say in the voting was really listening to Eric Bibb's Migration Blues or Elvin Bishop's Elvin Bishop's Big Fun Trio. But the point about no time for Lorde and all the time on earth for Hilarious Rodent Clinton is only too well taken.---EA.)

I've got to go buy that.  I love Taj Mahal, and Keb Mo ain't half bad!

Offline EasyAce

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,385
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Blue, 2012-2020---my big, gentle friend.
Re: Grammys Have Time for Hillary Clinton, But Not Lorde, To Perform?
« Reply #2 on: January 29, 2018, 06:11:33 pm »
I've got to go buy that.  I love Taj Mahal, and Keb Mo ain't half bad!
@Sanguine
I bought it when it was released. (I had it on pre-order through Amazon Prime, since I'm a longtime fan of both Taj Mahal and Keb' Mo'.) Yes---you've
got to buy that! (And, if you don't have it already, pick up Keb' Mo's That Hot Pink Blues Album, an excellent and extensive live album released
in 2016 . . . )


"The question of who is right is a small one, indeed, beside the question of what is right."---Albert Jay Nock.

Fake news---news you don't like or don't want to hear.

Offline dfwgator

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,534
Re: Grammys Have Time for Hillary Clinton, But Not Lorde, To Perform?
« Reply #3 on: January 29, 2018, 06:11:54 pm »
Guess Lorde will never be a Royal.

Offline Sanguine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,986
  • Gender: Female
  • Ex-member
Re: Grammys Have Time for Hillary Clinton, But Not Lorde, To Perform?
« Reply #4 on: January 29, 2018, 06:18:01 pm »
@Sanguine
I bought it when it was released. (I had it on pre-order through Amazon Prime, since I'm a longtime fan of both Taj Mahal and Keb' Mo'.) Yes---you've
got to buy that! (And, if you don't have it already, pick up Keb' Mo's That Hot Pink Blues Album, an excellent and extensive live album released
in 2016 . . . )

I will do that.

I got to see Taj in La Zona Rosa in Austin, several years ago.  He was great in person.

Offline EasyAce

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,385
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Blue, 2012-2020---my big, gentle friend.
Re: Grammys Have Time for Hillary Clinton, But Not Lorde, To Perform?
« Reply #5 on: January 29, 2018, 06:21:06 pm »
I will do that.

I got to see Taj in La Zona Rosa in Austin, several years ago.  He was great in person.
I got to see him on the stand where he cut this album back in the year . . . (Fillmore East, 1971) . . .

! No longer available


"The question of who is right is a small one, indeed, beside the question of what is right."---Albert Jay Nock.

Fake news---news you don't like or don't want to hear.

Offline Sanguine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,986
  • Gender: Female
  • Ex-member
Re: Grammys Have Time for Hillary Clinton, But Not Lorde, To Perform?
« Reply #6 on: January 29, 2018, 06:35:15 pm »
I got to see him on the stand where he cut this album back in the year . . . (Fillmore East, 1971) . . .

! No longer available

OK, you got me beat.  Good for you!

Offline EasyAce

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,385
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Blue, 2012-2020---my big, gentle friend.
Re: Grammys Have Time for Hillary Clinton, But Not Lorde, To Perform?
« Reply #7 on: January 29, 2018, 06:37:55 pm »
OK, you got me beat.  Good for you!
I told you I was a longtime fan. ;)


"The question of who is right is a small one, indeed, beside the question of what is right."---Albert Jay Nock.

Fake news---news you don't like or don't want to hear.

Offline skeeter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26,717
  • Gender: Male
Re: Grammys Have Time for Hillary Clinton, But Not Lorde, To Perform?
« Reply #8 on: January 29, 2018, 06:49:08 pm »
I haven't followed the Grammys for 25 years, but judging from the amount of sanctimony I've read was spewed I'm REALLY glad I missed this year's.

An opinion on the event in the Daily Beast made me chuckle - the writer split his essay between scoffing at old people for not being hip and scolding the industry for disrespecting women.
« Last Edit: January 29, 2018, 06:57:53 pm by skeeter »