Much like
India Arie, you don't really trust the Grammys. When we asked why the Grammy telecast's ratings took a dip, most of our readers voted that they can't take the ceremony seriously. That could mean a number of things, and perhaps I should've been more specific with the choices? We'll simply infer that you believe the ceremony is just a way for the industry to pat itself on the back, with no input from the public that is actually consuming the product. Although, if the Grammys were voted on by the public, then
Soulja Boy would've won for "Best Rap Song", effectively revealing what my own personal Hell would look and sound like. Also, that's a fantastic segue into the next paragraph.
"Awful music in 2007" ran a close second, which means there was probably nothing that deserved to be celebrated in the first place. I can only hope this means many of you, like me, are music elitists, and I love you very much and thank you for visiting SoulBounce.
Comments
Well, as a NARAS member, I have to say this...the Grammys are only as "good" as the people who qualify to vote for them. Meaning that y'all need to tell some of your faves to get up off of the $150 in annual dues and register as voting members so they can vote for their own stuff. MANY artists you assume would be members are not, which precludes them from voting for anything, let alone their own music.
Membership DOES have its privileges!
And when it comes down to the scarcity of good selections, chalk that up to those poor unfortunate souls who are more swayed by the prospect of fast cash than the soul in the music itself.
** stepping off of my soapbox now **
Stephanie Renee | February 23, 2008 7:01 AM | Permalink