What, no Grammy comments?

[Flint]

Lowest rated Grammy's ever, or at least that's what somebody said. I haven't seen the numbers, but it wouldn't surprise me. Lots of people are getting turned off with politics taking a front seat on a lot of shows these days.

It's my opinion that watching TV - especially live TV - has become a non-core activity for the generation of people who the artists getting the most attention at the Grammys would want to see. In other words, their target audience doesn't watch live TV in the same numbers older generations did. I think politics and lack of old-school artists may have driven away the old tried and true fan from our generation who want to believe we are up to date on the music scene all the kids are jammin' to, but I don't think the people spending money on the music which got awards really care about watching a show and that is the main reason the numbers are going down. Shows like this are a thing of the past and the numbers are merely reflecting that reality.

 

[Flint]

I mean... back in our generation we were afforded very few opportunities to see our favorite artists. We could go to their concert every couple of years, see them on TV from time to time, or occasionally read an interview in a magazine, but that was it. Today fans can see their favorite musicians on social media every day and have a more direct relationship with them. Catching them being watered down on an awards show isn't very special at all. If you could attend the show in person you would, but otherwise there's no point. In fact, chances are very likely you can watch just the artists you care about on YouTube the day after the show.

 

[Huey]

It's my opinion that watching TV - especially live TV - has become a non-core activity for the generation of people who the artists getting the most attention at the Grammys would want to see. In other words, their target audience doesn't watch live TV in the same numbers older generations did. I think politics and lack of old-school artists may have driven away the old tried and true fan from our generation who want to believe we are up to date on the music scene all the kids are jammin' to, but I don't think the people spending money on the music which got awards really care about watching a show and that is the main reason the numbers are going down. Shows like this are a thing of the past and the numbers are merely reflecting that reality.

I could be wrong, and usually are, but don't the numbers also include if the show was DVR'd? I thought a few years ago they started including if the show was recorded or not in the Nielsen numbers.

 

[Flint]

I could be wrong, and usually are, but don't the numbers also include if the show was DVR'd? I thought a few years ago they started including if the show was recorded or not in the Nielsen numbers.

No one under 35 knows what a DVR is. They just stream it later.

 

[Huey]

No one under 35 knows what a DVR is. They just stream it later.

But I think they are also taking that into account as well. Either way, it has to be down. When half of your audience doesn't agree with you, it's not hard to see ratings would be down.

 

[Flint]

But I think they are also taking that into account as well. Either way, it has to be down. When half of your audience doesn't agree with you, it's not hard to see ratings would be down.

They cannot take into account streaming after the fact because all those people hadn't streamed it when the numbers were released. I guess you aren't hearing me... you can go on YouTube and watch anything after the fact. The shows get taken down within hours, but they also keep getting put back up, so it works.

 

[Deleted member 133]

But I think they are also taking that into account as well. Either way, it has to be down. When half of your audience doesn't agree with you, it's not hard to see ratings would be down.

But if, over time, everyone who does not like the show stops watching, and only those who like what they are seeing and hearing watch, then how can half the audience not agree with you?

As everyone has been saying, anti-Trump sentiments permeate all such shows and events, and have for the last year (or more), so you would think that by now hardly any Trump supporters would still be watching (a reasonable conclusion if viewership is down?) and therefore it is doubtful that half the audience still doesn't agree with you.

And that's just the raw numbers.

Like Zing I have trouble relating to a lot of the acts (except for the Canadian ones) that make up the Grammies. Likewise I doubt that many old white mid-west wives (solid core of Trump supporters) were inclined to tune in either.

So I'm mystified as to where this "half the audience" comes from?

It seems to me that, in content and comment, the Grammies know exactly who their audience is and they are pandering to it to perfection. The Grammies are not unlike any other social media bubble.

And in any case, the Junos are always a much better event to watch!



Captain Canuck

 

[Huey]

They cannot take into account streaming after the fact because all those people hadn't streamed it when the numbers were released. I guess you aren't hearing me... you can go on YouTube and watch anything after the fact. The shows get taken down within hours, but they also keep getting put back up, so it works.

I do understand what you are saying, but the article I read is that they don't stop tracking numbers right after the airing of the program, but they have three tiers, live and same day, 3 days out and then also 7 days out. The numbers we are hearing I understand from the original airing, but they will also keep tracking up until 7 days later.

 

[Flint]

I do understand what you are saying, but the article I read is that they don't stop tracking numbers right after the airing of the program, but they have three tiers, live and same day, 3 days out and then also 7 days out. The numbers we are hearing I understand from the original airing, but they will also keep tracking up until 7 days later.

Yes, they actually track the numbers almost forever in the world of on demand streaming. But then you cannot make a statement on the numbers being "down" two days after it aired. My point is this... a very large portion of the so called "millennials" don't watch live TV, they don't always stream official content, and often just watch illegal uploads to YouTube (which eventually get flagged and removed). They also watch clips from the artists they follow, often that is not tracked (sometimes it is). Basically, the way numbers are calculated are for the old way of doing things (though they are trying to get better they cannot keep up and it doesn't help with advertising anyway). So...

I am saying kids don't care about the old world model for consuming video content like this - especially this type of content. They will go out of their way to stream GoT or similar, but a one off show with only a couple of short moments they might want to see? They do it very, very differently than we old farts can comprehend.

 

[Towen7]

Lowest rated Grammy's ever, or at least that's what somebody said. I haven't seen the numbers, but it wouldn't surprise me. Lots of people are getting turned off with politics taking a front seat on a lot of shows these days.

A lot of people are getting turned off with politics taking a front seat on a forum that used to be about Home Audio and Theater.

 

[Akula]

Now that some funny stuff right there. May I use that?

By all means.

To be fair, the people making the anti-Trump political jokes live their entire lives surrounded by people who share their viewpoints on Trump and who have Trump on their minds all the time. This is them honestly thinking they are being funny to the world.

They're welcome to do as they wish. There's other channels and my remote works, so I feel no need to watch that which bores me.


I will add that the hosting of the show was also so-so. There's other award shows (CMAs, for example) where the hosting is more enjoyable and adds to the experience. This one, not so much.

 

[Flint]

A lot of people are getting turned off with politics taking a front seat on a forum that used to be about Home Audio and Theater.

That's not fair.... with this forum we have a dedicated section for divisive political talk which can easily be ignored while still seeing everything else the forum has to offer. The awards shows thread the politics throughout the experience and one cannot avoid it while still getting bits you want.

 

[heeman]

That's not fair.... with this forum we have a dedicated section for divisive political talk which can easily be ignored while still seeing everything else the forum has to offer. The awards shows thread the politics throughout the experience and one cannot avoid it while still getting bits you want.

I just don’t like when it gets out of hand and our good friends don’t show up anymore.

 

[Randy]

I just don’t like when it gets out of hand and our good friends don’t show up anymore.

Amen Brother!!!

 

[mzpro5]

I didn't watch and wouldn't have recognized most of the "musicians" that were featured. Can't remeber the last time I listened to radio or other media that features current popular music.

 

[Huey]

A lot of people are getting turned off with politics taking a front seat on a forum that used to be about Home Audio and Theater.

The Grammy's decided to politicize itself with the reading of fire and fury by celebs. Are we not supposed to talk about it?

 

[Towen7]

Talk all you want. Just know that a lot of people are turned off by it.

 

[Deleted member 133]

The Grammy's decided to politicize itself with the reading of fire and fury by celebs. Are we not supposed to talk about it?

If I may, perhaps some context should be added.

First off we've already established that this is not the first time that the Grammy's, or almost any awards show, has "politicized itself." Can everyone agree on that?

It's also not the first time that the Grammy's, or almost any awards show, has taken a swipe at a major political figure - usually through humour (or the attempt thereof), monologues, skits, musical routines, etc.. Can we agree on that?

That that figure is likely the most polarizing politician in modern Western history is perhaps something else that most of us might agree on. But I accept that there may be dissenters.

The reading of Fire and Fury would therefore not only be usual, but also expected. Was it a failed attempt at humour? A bad lampooning of an easy target? I'm sure there are opinions on that both ways.

BUT does "reading" not also perfectly fit the Grammys itself? Absolutely. The Grammys have handed out an award for Best Spoken Word Album since 1959. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammy_Award_for_Best_Spoken_Word_Album]. That context was integral to the "skit." And how could you not finish the skit with Hillary - herself a former (1997) Grammy winner in the category?

And by the by, while the book might make some go apoplectic, the excerpts that were read in that skit were far from being controversial. I thought it was hilarious that, if you looked closely enough, you could see the remnants of what was likely some weed smoke floating away from Snoop (17 time Grammy nominee). Cher's (8 time Grammy nominee and 1 time winner) deliberately horrible reading style: just as funny. (I was laughing at her - how she was reading - not what she was reading.) Having Hillary start with the book in front of her face and then lowering it was, surely you have to admit, good theatre. And by the way John Legend and Cardi B are also Grammy nominees / winners; "celebs" yes, but also highly appropriate ones for the skit.

I apologize in advance if my talking about it just now has turned anyone off.

Jeff

 

[TitaniumTroy]

As with all other awards show's, I DVRd it and then fast forwarded thru 75% of the Grammy's. Life is too damn short to listen to pretentious/boring/politcal speeches, endless commercials, music I don't connect with etc...
I listen mostly to see if any of performing acts sound interesting and to see who won a few select categories.

If I want to watch some good Trump jokes or commentary, I will watch Stephen Colbert on The Late Show or Lawrence O'Donnell's The Last Word.

Be you young or old The Grammy's are pretty irrelevant.