It’s quite easy to spot the identity crisis that the Grammys are facing. During the open minutes of the program this year, host Trevor Noah unintentionally made this confusion apparent present quite early. From the rooftop of the neon desert that is Las Vegas, he told us to get excited for the forthcoming “biggest award in music.” But moments later, he argued that this isn’t really an award show. Instead, “a concert where we’re giving out awards.”
Later, Noah said the awards don’t really matter. In jest, he claimed that in the end, every artist here is rich, which is what really matters. But shortly after, Olivia Rodrigo claimed that winning the “Best New Artist” award was her “biggest dream come true.”
It’s a little hard to decipher what we’re supposed to be watching for during the Grammys. The world is incredibly polarized about what we’re supposed to get from the award show. Numerous controversies in recent years – not just for the Grammys but for award shows in general – have alienated the form of entertainment for many. Even this year, the show didn’t escape without looking tone-deaf a couple of times. Many think the award ceremonies are unfair, and some boycott the event.
Grammys get loads of attention, but certainly less than their peak. They’re trying to salvage that by casting the net as wide as possible for viewers. In other words, the identity crisis that the award show faces is less of a “crisis” and more of a methodical approach to its marketing. Think the awards are rigged? Fine, they say, because they have a load of performances that they think can get your eyeballs for three-and-a-half hours. It’s a music festival on TV! Think the awards themselves are incredibly important? Good, they’ll tell you, because it’s the “biggest night in music.” Grammys don’t want to box themselves in. Having one identity cancels themselves out from having another, and that’s not what they want.
That certainly isn’t a flawless formula, but it’s one they’re trying. Speaking to a few friends and telling them that I recorded the Grammys to write an article, many said “You care?” Well, sort of. Maybe. I was completely at peace with not watching it live, for what that is worth. When looking at the general public, there is a lot of music passionate folks that skipped the event.
The elephant in the room is that a lack of interest to some extent will not have much to do with the show itself. Many of these award shows have yet to fully transition into the internet age, and they’re slowly being left behind because of it. Film, movies and even sports are in the internet age, and they’re willing to accommodate cord-cutters completely. Uploading performances that happened during the commercials, or hosting your “Premier Ceremony” on Youtube won’t bring viewers back. You can’t bring cord-cutters back. They’re gone. You have to come to them because they can’t come back to you. It will be interesting to see how the awards will try to adapt in the years to come.
This likely isn’t the first time you have read or heard someone outline their qualms with the Grammys. Now that’s out of the way, here are a couple more takeaways from the night.
Silk Sonic Emerge As Main Characters
The broadcast had Silk Sonic on early. That’s fine, especially considering that you saw them again, then again, and then again. While Sunday put a big spotlight on Jon Batiste and showed the first of likely many successful Grammys for Olivia Rodrigo, it felt that the R&B duo were the main characters of the night.
Bruno Mars and Anderson .Paak stuck out throughout the night. As expected, the evening of awards is full of grateful tears and passionate moments. On the other hand, Silk Sonic showed composure and swagger that the big lights and awards couldn’t shake. As much as it is great to see artists show their gratitude in the big moment, it didn’t feel off that Silk Sonic had a different approach. “We are really trying to remain humble at this point,” .Paak smugly said when they hit the stage to accept their second award during the broadcast (in total they left the entire ceremony with four trophies in total).
The duo’s performance of “Leave the Door Open” came more than a year after the song first dropped. Yet, nothing about the song felt old. Okay, something felt old about a track that is a clear ode to 1970s soul music. But you get what I mean. Every part of Silk Sonic’s presence at the Grammys was thrilling, and it’s hard to see them as anything but the biggest names coming out of the weekend.
Ads Want Me To Spend Money, But Also Want Me To Think I Can Make Money
I can’t speak for the American TV feed for the Grammys, but I imagine it’s similar. The Grammys had a lot of the usual things you expect from the broadcast: the host channel tries to sell their homegrown programs to you, and ads for the Junos run (for those who don’t know, that’s our Grammys). But this year saw itself amid the same epidemic that TV as a whole is suffering through: ads about ways to (potentially) make money.
Crypto.com’s ad told you to be brave and get into cryptocurrencies. Wealthsimple sort of mocked you if you don’t like investing, joking that the invention of the wheel was considered a “ponzi scheme” at one point. And sites like BetMGM told you to spend money on sports gambling. As Rebecca Jennings wrote in February, “there has never been a more opportune time to have “money” as a hobby.” I’m not sure how much you see these ads in real life – I can think of a few times, as the towering Crypto.com ad at Dundas Square in Toronto. But in the TV world, it is quite inescapable, and the Grammys were no exception.