-
-
Billboard Article: The Grammys New Guard On ‘Big, Bold Changes’ In The Recording Academy’s Future
ReplyOn Grammy night, they’re under the spotlight. But the academy’s leadership is working tirelessly and — despite some growing pains — progressing toward stability and much-needed evolution.
And that’s just one of many notable Grammy firsts this year. This will be the first show since the Recording Academy eliminated the nomination review committees earlier in 2021, ending a 30-year practice in which anonymous members determined the final slate of nominees in 59 of the awards’ 84 categories. It will be the first since the academy implemented an inclusion rider to set benchmarks for increasing diversity and equity in both on and offstage positions. And it will be the first with all Big Four categories — album, record and song of the year, and best new artist — expanded from eight to 10 nominees each, resulting in recognition for artists including Taylor Swift and Kanye West.
ReplyCopy URLRegarding genre placement:
The genre-screening committees — which comprise around 350 creatives, music experts and executives — came under criticism this fall for removing works, including those from Kacey Musgraves and Brandi Carlile, from the genres in which they were submitted and reslotting them elsewhere. Why shouldn’t an entry stay where the label or the creator of the work thinks it belongs?
MASON: You’re seeing genre lines blurring. You’re seeing people switching from song to song as to what [their music] sounds like. With the screening committees, we’re listening and making sure that we’re paying attention to that, because if not, we’re just stereotyping everything: “Oh, this person makes these types of songs, they should go in that category.” The committees are made up of the artist’s peers. They’re evaluating and deciding, “Does this fit within the confines of the construct of what this category means?” Those definitions are created by our members that are ratified by our board. If we’re opening it up to just anyone to decide where they want to submit, there could potentially be problems that come along with that. But also, you have to remember that we are looking at the process and how we do everything is always up for review.
ReplyCopy URLRegarding genre placement:
The genre-screening committees — which comprise around 350 creatives, music experts and executives — came under criticism this fall for removing works, including those from Kacey Musgraves and Brandi Carlile, from the genres in which they were submitted and reslotting them elsewhere. Why shouldn’t an entry stay where the label or the creator of the work thinks it belongs?
MASON: You’re seeing genre lines blurring. You’re seeing people switching from song to song as to what [their music] sounds like. With the screening committees, we’re listening and making sure that we’re paying attention to that, because if not, we’re just stereotyping everything: “Oh, this person makes these types of songs, they should go in that category.” The committees are made up of the artist’s peers. They’re evaluating and deciding, “Does this fit within the confines of the construct of what this category means?” Those definitions are created by our members that are ratified by our board. If we’re opening it up to just anyone to decide where they want to submit, there could potentially be problems that come along with that. But also, you have to remember that we are looking at the process and how we do everything is always up for review.
Idk why this is even an issue, tbh. Allowing someone like Kacey Musgraves to commit category fraud because Country is the easiest field to win for her is tomfoolery. I feel like people will continue to nitpick things at the Grammys in order to get their way, even if it’s unethical.
ReplyCopy URLRegarding genre placement:
The genre-screening committees — which comprise around 350 creatives, music experts and executives — came under criticism this fall for removing works, including those from Kacey Musgraves and Brandi Carlile, from the genres in which they were submitted and reslotting them elsewhere. Why shouldn’t an entry stay where the label or the creator of the work thinks it belongs?
MASON: You’re seeing genre lines blurring. You’re seeing people switching from song to song as to what [their music] sounds like. With the screening committees, we’re listening and making sure that we’re paying attention to that, because if not, we’re just stereotyping everything: “Oh, this person makes these types of songs, they should go in that category.” The committees are made up of the artist’s peers. They’re evaluating and deciding, “Does this fit within the confines of the construct of what this category means?” Those definitions are created by our members that are ratified by our board. If we’re opening it up to just anyone to decide where they want to submit, there could potentially be problems that come along with that. But also, you have to remember that we are looking at the process and how we do everything is always up for review.
I agree with them and I’m glad that they’re acknowledging the stereotypes that exist. Albums should be evaluated on their own merit and not on what the voters think the artists have historically made.
ReplyCopy URLit is a difficult decision to make because there are pros and cons to both decisions when it comes to gendered categories, obviously if they existed it would allow representation for both sexes in a genre every year, and artists should be able to submit to either gender category of their choosing, but non binary artists would be disinfranchised. Although there have been very few non binary artists to breakthrough to grammy level success, this would most limely just reinforce this. It is a very convuluted subject with arguments to be made on both sides.
ReplyCopy URLI hope they bring back best male and female vocal performance those genderless categories are BS cuz it diminishes chances for one gender…
- Genderless categories allow non-binary and genderfluid artists to submit comfortably.
- Just for example, the Pop field is dominated by female artists. A male category in that field would not be competitive. Winners would be deserving, but the 4th/5th most voted nominees would just be veteran/darling namechecks. And someone would pull a John Mayer and win every two years.
- And let’s not even talk about Best Female Rap Performance. The lineup would be the same every year.
- H.E.R. would pull an Aretha Franklin and win Female R&B Vocal 8 years in a row.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
