|
Music News: Steve Stoute shows his ass, embarrasses himself re: Grammys
Member Since: 9/21/2010
Posts: 29,122
|
Steve Stoute shows his ass, embarrasses himself re: Grammys
Steve Stoute, music industry tycoon is calling out the NARAS and their ****ery, their ******** (paraphrasing here) about the deserving artists being snubbed and used in only efforts to get ratings. Do you share the same view as Mr. Stout? Well I beseech you to read this letter as I think he glorifies some of the points most of us "music junkies" argue all the time.
Quote:
Over the course of my 20-year history as an executive in the music business and as the owner of a firm that specializes in in-culture advertising, I have come to the conclusion that the Grammy Awards have clearly lost touch with contemporary popular culture. My being a music fan has left me with an even greater and deeper sense of dismay—so much so that I feel compelled to write this letter. Where I think that the Grammys fail stems from two key sources: (1) over-zealousness to produce a popular show that is at odds with its own system of voting and (2) fundamental disrespect of cultural shifts as being viable and artistic.
As an institution that celebrates artistic works of musicians, singers, songwriters, producers and technical specialists, we have come to expect that the Grammys upholds all of the values that reflect the very best in music that is born from our culture. Unfortunately, the awards show has become a series of hypocrisies and contradictions, leaving me to question why any contemporary popular artist would even participate. How is it possible that in 2001 The Marshall Mathers LP—an album by Eminem that ushered in the Bob Dylan of our time—was beaten out by Steely Dan (no disrespect) for Album Of The Year? While we cannot solely utilize album sales as the barometer, this was certainly not the case. Not only is Eminem the best-selling artist of the last decade, but The Marshall Mathers LP was a critical and commercial success that sold over 10 million albums in the United States (19 million worldwide), while Steely Dan sold less than 10% of that amount and came and went as quietly as a church mouse. Or consider even that in 2008 at the 50th Annual Grammy Awards, after going into the night as the most-nominated artist, Kanye West’s Graduation was beaten out for Album Of The Year by Herbie Hancock’s River: The Joni Letters. (This was the first time in 43 years that a jazz album won this category.) While there is no doubt in my mind of the artistic talents of Steely Dan or Herbie Hancock, we must acknowledge the massive cultural impact of Eminem and Kanye West and how their music is shaping, influencing and defining the voice of a generation. It is this same cultural impact that acknowledged the commercial and critical success of Michael Jackson’s Thriller in 1984.
Just so that I’m not showing partiality to hip-hop artists (although it would be an entirely different letter as to how hip-hop music has been totally diminished as an art form by this organization), how is it that Justin Bieber, an artist that defines what it means to be a modern artist, did not win Best New Artist? Again, his cultural impact and success are even more quantifiable if you factor in his YouTube and Vevo viewership—the fact that he was a talent born entirely of the digital age whose story was crafted in the most humble method of being “discovered” purely for his singing ability (and it should be noted that Justin Bieber plays piano and guitar, as evidenced on his early viral videos).
So while these very artists that the public acknowledges as being worthy of their money and fandom are snubbed year after year at the Grammys, the awards show has absolutely no qualms in inviting these same artists to perform. At first I thought that you were not paying attention to the fact that the mental complexion of the world is becoming tanned, that multiculturalism and poly-ethnicity are driving new meaning as to what is culturally relevant. Interesting that the Grammys understands cultural relevance when it comes to using Eminem’s, Kanye West’s or Justin Bieber’s name in the billing to ensure viewership and to deliver the all-too-important ratings for its advertisers.
What truly inspired the writing of this letter was that this most recent show fed my suspicions. As the show was coming to a close and just prior to presenting the award for Album Of The Year, the band Arcade Fire performed “Month of May”—only to… surprise… win the category and, in a moment of sheer coincidence, happened to be prepared to perform “Ready to Start.”
Does the Grammys intentionally use artists for their celebrity, popularity and cultural appeal when they already know the winners and then program a show against this expectation? Meanwhile the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences hides behind the “peer” voting system to escape culpability for not even rethinking its approach.
And I imagine that next year there will be another televised super-close-up of an astonished front-runner as they come to the realization before a national audience… that he or she was used.
You are being called to task at this very moment, NARAS.
And to all of the artists that attend the Grammys: Stop accepting the invitation to be the upset of the year and demand that this body upholds its mission for advocacy and support of artistry as culture evolves.
Demand that they change this system and truly reflect and truly acknowledge your art.
|
SOurce: Rap-Up
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/15/2010
Posts: 14,318
|
He has some very valid points, but:
Quote:
how is it that Justin Bieber, an artist that defines what it means to be a modern artist, did not win Best New Artist? Again, his cultural impact and success are even more quantifiable if you factor in his YouTube and Vevo viewership—the fact that he was a talent born entirely of the digital age whose story was crafted in the most humble method of being “discovered” purely for his singing ability (and it should be noted that Justin Bieber plays piano and guitar, as evidenced on his early viral videos).
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 8/2/2010
Posts: 7,960
|
I cannot take this guy seriously if he thinks Bieber should have won Best New Artist.
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 3/17/2010
Posts: 4,869
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Jewfro
I cannot take this guy seriously if he thinks Bieber should have won Best New Artist.
|
KE$HA deserved it.
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/10/2009
Posts: 6,321
|
This article lost credibility in my mind when they said Justin Bieber deserved the Best New Artist award.
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/14/2009
Posts: 34,871
|
Child,people need to get over that New Artist ****. Justin,as well as everyone else. Just because Esperanza doesn't appeal to a shitload of prepubescent 13 year old teens doesn't mean ****. Luckily tha grammys aren't a ****** voting process like tha Kids Choice Awards in which Justin would have won everything. Maybe he'll make songs with substance now,and that Pray song doesn't count cause it sounds forced as hell,he know damn well he didn't wanna record that
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/10/2009
Posts: 10,662
|
I completely agree with everything this guy said, and i've been saying it myself ever since i began watching the Grammys.
Relevant pop (mainstream) acts are there for Promotional purposes.
Underground or non-mainstream (country, etc) acts are there to recieve the awards.
The only time they recognize mainstream acts is within their respective categories. Best POP, Rap, etc...
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/27/2006
Posts: 51,546
|
He isn't wrong about Bieber. Get the stick out of your asses.
*not saying he SHOULD have won. his points are valid, though.*
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/22/2009
Posts: 50,646
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/25/2001
Posts: 26,816
|
|
|
|
ATRL Moderator
Member Since: 11/22/2010
Posts: 10,782
|
|
|
|
ATRL Moderator
Member Since: 2/19/2003
Posts: 34,484
|
" Does the Grammys intentionally use artists for their celebrity, popularity and cultural appeal when they already know the winners and then program a show against this expectation?"
Also, inspiration 4, your point would hold more weight if the last four SoTY winners - Lady Antebellum, Beyoncé, Coldplay and Amy Winehouse - weren't four of the biggest, most popular artists of their particular years.
When will people realize that in a just world an album that gets a 93 on Metacritic should and will always beat an album that gets a 63?
|
|
|
Member Since: 7/27/2004
Posts: 3,188
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Rico Shameless v2
He isn't wrong about Bieber. Get the stick out of your asses.
*not saying he SHOULD have won. his points are valid, though.*
|
I agree.
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/3/2010
Posts: 50,276
|
Quote:
how is it that Justin Bieber, an artist that defines what it means to be a modern artist, did not win Best New Artist? Again, his cultural impact and success are even more quantifiable if you factor in his YouTube and Vevo viewership—the fact that he was a talent born entirely of the digital age whose story was crafted in the most humble method of being “discovered” purely for his singing ability (and it should be noted that Justin Bieber plays piano and guitar, as evidenced on his early viral videos).
|
No. Just No.
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/25/2010
Posts: 2,692
|
When Taylor won last year for AOTY, a lot of people were complaining about Grammy's preferring commercial success over quality. Now that good material is finally getting recognized over commercial success, people are still complaining..
A MESS
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/6/2006
Posts: 15,696
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Jewfro
I cannot take this guy seriously if he thinks Bieber should have won Best New Artist.
|
Quote:
Originally posted by stıcks
This article lost credibility in my mind when they said Justin Bieber deserved the Best New Artist award.
|
Esperenza deserved it even tho I'm still not familiar wit her or her music she seems very talented. No shade here honest.
|
|
|
Member Since: 7/27/2004
Posts: 3,188
|
The Grammys are getting more and more commercial... 10 years ago Lady Gaga, Rihanna, and Taylor Swift would have never won Grammys. They'd have to "prove" their stance in the industry first.
And while I understand the hate of Justin Bieber, we Britney stans should remember that at some point Britney was in that position. Out of all the Best New Artist nominees, she has proven that she was indeed the rightful owner of that award.
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/17/2010
Posts: 21,708
|
What about all that ******** about artists doing it for the music and enjoyment and not caring about awards?
And Justin Bieber not winning a Grammy isn't going to stop those millions of teenage girls from worshiping him.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/13/2010
Posts: 5,334
|
|
|
|
ATRL Moderator
Member Since: 2/19/2003
Posts: 34,484
|
Quote:
Originally posted by SarahWalker
When Taylor won last year for AOTY, a lot of people were complaining about Grammy's preferring commercial success over quality. Now that good material is finally getting recognized over commercial success, people are still complaining..
A MESS
|
I think the point this "writer" was TRYING to make is that NARAS is still reticent to fully reward hip-hop/urban acts. That point holds water; this grammatically flawed mess doesn't. I mean, didn't T-Swift just win last year?
|
|
|
|
|