grammys

[cdirty]

didnt really watch but, during the segment where they paid tribute to all those who had passed during the year, Dilla was showed. Excuse my engrish I just woke up.

[Lon`]

was really disapointed when I heard Ludacris' won best album of the year. That album was horrible from 1-9, and barely decent after that. Food & Liquor is 20x the album, and the Game theory is in the same vote.

Pop culture, ugh

[Marklar]

the grammys are wack, they are responsible for 9/11. ask dumby. zionism.

[Nasty]

Originally Posted by Marklar

the grammys are wack, they are responsible for 9/11. ask dumby. zionism.

That was funny.

[Marklar]

Originally Posted by Nasty

That was funny.

dude that wasn't a joke. you sheep have no idea. the grammys are voted on by the millions of jews who were NOT killed in the holocaust because that obviously never happened. they all live on an island in the south pacific called jewtopia.

[Nasty]

Originally Posted by Marklar

dude that wasn't a joke. you sheep have no idea. the grammys are voted on by the millions of jews who were NOT killed in the holocaust because that obviously never happened. they all live on an island in the south pacific called jewtopia.

Ha!!

[Fullmetal]

Originally Posted by Lon`

was really disapointed when I heard Ludacris' won best album of the year. That album was horrible from 1-9, and barely decent after that. Food & Liquor is 20x the album, and the Game theory is in the same vote.

Pop culture, ugh

This is the reason I stopped watching the Grammys... how the FUCK Ludacris got album of the year, with that semi-wack piece of shit over LUPE FIASCO, or the ROOTS is BEYOND me. Pop culture is a double edged sword boy,I tell ya.

[skibadee]

Originally Posted by Marklar

dude that wasn't a joke. you sheep have no idea. the grammys are voted on by the millions of jews who were NOT killed in the holocaust because that obviously never happened. they all live on an island in the south pacific called jewtopia.

HAHAHAHA... hilarious

[Fullmetal]

And LOL @ "Jewtopia" That sounds like an awesome Cartman rant. The question is though, Marklar, do Jews run the internet?

[cdirty]

Originally Posted by Fullmetal

And LOL @ "Jewtopia" That sounds like an awesome Cartman rant. The question is though, Marklar, do Jews run the internet?

duh! ever heard of joogle?

[Nasty]

Originally Posted by Fullmetal

This is the reason I stopped watching the Grammys... how the FUCK Ludacris got album of the year, with that semi-wack piece of shit over LUPE FIASCO, or the ROOTS is BEYOND me. Pop culture is a double edged sword boy,I tell ya.

Lupe Fiasco.

[twisted_harmonix]

yeah i was baffled when i saw that luda had won. release therapy is his worst album by far.

but then i was thinking about it and in a way it kinda makes sense that he would win. the grammys are not about the "best". i mean, look... it took them this long to realize mary j had talent. the people that vote for these awards are previous winners. the majority of which are not hiphop artists. not only that but they do not listen to hiphop and probably have never even listened to the albums that are up for nomination. ludacris is now in the public eye -- he has been in various movies including the best-picture academy award winning "crash". he looks more polished and clean-cut than other rappers, as we've seen him on oprah and various other pop culture shows (even tho in reality he's all street in his heart, you can see that in his live shows). the voters see his name on the ballet, see that he hasn't won an award, then look at the nice young man they see on the cover of "release therapy", maybe they hear an interview of him talking about how this is his most personal heartfelt album that deals with real issues yadda yadda... they look at his sales figues and think it must be a good album if so many folks purchased it, and maybe they hear the single "runaway love" and dig it, ...and they look at his name on a ballot next to a few others they have hardly heard anything about... and put a check next to his name. how many actually really listen to the entire album of every nominee??... i would have to guess VERY FEW... probably less than 5%, maybe as few as 1%.

so at first i was shocked but now the more i think about it, the more i understand. luda deserves an award, but not for this album. just more reaffirmation that the grammys are a bunch of bullshit. its no more credible than a high school election... just a popularity contest.

but at least they finally gave mary her props.

[nick.in.oside]

don't they incorporate sales in some aspect? i think i remember that being part of the criteria

[eamon]

From Wikipedia

As with all media awards, the Grammy Awards are often criticized for failing to adequately represent the popular sentiment of the public. The Recording Academy and record companies are responsible for entering the works that they deem most deserving. Once a work is entered, reviewing sessions are held by over 150 experts from the recording industry. This is done only to determine whether or not a work is eligible or entered into the proper category. The nominating process requires that members vote only in their fields of expertise. They may nominate in the four general categories (Record Of The Year, Album Of The Year, Song Of The Year and Best New Artist) and in no more than nine out of 31 fields on their ballots. Once the nominations are secured, Recording Academy members may then vote in the four general categories and in no more than eight of the 31 fields. Ballots again are tabulated in secrecy by the major independent accounting firm, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu.[1] However, the nature of both the nominating and voting processes are becoming increasingly questioned by industry critics.


There is much debate about whether or not this sort of nominating process is the result of commercial, political or industry bias. Some conservative critics have argued that major award shows like the Grammy Awards are merely the recording industry's attempt to congratulate their own while advertising their products and ideas through the use of selection bias in the nominating process. The winners, critics argue, would naturally reflect "the social, political and artistic preferences of the nominating and voting members." Other critics, including those within the industry, openly question whether the Grammy Awards are even relevant in today's digital society. [2]

[Fullmetal]

Originally Posted by eamon

From Wikipedia

As with all media awards, the Grammy Awards are often criticized for failing to adequately represent the popular sentiment of the public. The Recording Academy and record companies are responsible for entering the works that they deem most deserving. Once a work is entered, reviewing sessions are held by over 150 experts from the recording industry. This is done only to determine whether or not a work is eligible or entered into the proper category. The nominating process requires that members vote only in their fields of expertise. They may nominate in the four general categories (Record Of The Year, Album Of The Year, Song Of The Year and Best New Artist) and in no more than nine out of 31 fields on their ballots. Once the nominations are secured, Recording Academy members may then vote in the four general categories and in no more than eight of the 31 fields. Ballots again are tabulated in secrecy by the major independent accounting firm, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu.[1] However, the nature of both the nominating and voting processes are becoming increasingly questioned by industry critics.


There is much debate about whether or not this sort of nominating process is the result of commercial, political or industry bias. Some conservative critics have argued that major award shows like the Grammy Awards are merely the recording industry's attempt to congratulate their own while advertising their products and ideas through the use of selection bias in the nominating process. The winners, critics argue, would naturally reflect "the social, political and artistic preferences of the nominating and voting members." Other critics, including those within the industry, openly question whether the Grammy Awards are even relevant in today's digital society. [2]

Damn, E, that was well-needed. I've been thinkin that for a couple years
now.

Especially when "Steely Dan" won album of the year... over so many other albums..