Comments on: The Grammy Ratings

By: Name withheld

Name withheld — Sat, 11 Feb 2006 18:58:01 +0000

I worked on the show for more than 30 years – part of the NARAS team. That’s one of the reasons I left – could’t stand the bullshit, the hypocrisy,the non-music people, interested in one thing only – SELF PRESERVATION AT ANY COST.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Sat, 11 Feb 2006 18:57:40 +0000

I completely and utterly disagree with you. I am a 23 year old female who works in the music industry. I spend countless hours on myspace, on music blogs, downloading new music, going to shows 3 4 times a week, doing whatever I can to expose myself to new music. Normally, I don't watch the Grammys. They are ridiculous and boring. Most of the musicians look drugged performing, and the ones who are nominated are hardly credible.

But this year it was amazing! Mary J. Blige made Bono look like a choirboy (as my friend Amy says), Kanye is marvelously talented, and Madonna is an inspiration to all women! And although poor Sly is on crack, at least it exposes the youth to an old yet revolutionary kind of music that they are not currently aware of.

It doesn't seem like you have an idea what in the hell you are talking about when it comes to youth. Go to any high school in southern california and all those kids will prove you wrong. Myspace helps these kids get into music they wouldn't have normally gotten into. Trust me. As the older sister, I am the one driving them to the shows, where they buy TONS of MERCH including CDs. Even if the way they listen to the music, or support the music, or what they listen to is not appealing to you, kids are still just as impassioned about an artist as we were when we were young. Everyone in the industry reads you, so I think you should be a little more educated about what you are talking about. I am tempted to start my own version of the Lefsetz letter. One that better represents youth and young people in the music industry.

If you use this e-mail, please make it anonymous.

By: Shaun Mason

Shaun Mason — Sat, 11 Feb 2006 18:57:15 +0000

You're absolutely right. No one gives a flying shit about the fucking grammies, nor should they. Record companies are selling us corn cobs to wipe our asses with and telling us it's Cottenelle, then givng themselves awards for biggest cob, roughest cob, best white cob, best black cob, best hispanic cob, best new cob, and apparently most stoned cob, given to Sly Stone. That may have been the saddest thing I've seen on TV outside the New Orleans Superdome after Katrina.

Fucking Chapelle wasn't even funny.

By: Steve Rosenblatt

Steve Rosenblatt — Sat, 11 Feb 2006 18:56:54 +0000

I was at the Grammies last night and left after about an hour, so boring. I picked up some Indian food and went home where my kids were watching the show (long drive back to the 818 during rush hour and a long wait at the Indian place so it took about two hours!). The funny thing is as they were watching the show my kids kept saying (my girls are 12 and 15 years old) how old the performers were. It reminded me when I was a kid watching the Grammies and I thought the show was full of old singers who had no relevance to me. I used to wonder why the Beatles or The Stones or the Who weren't on it, as I got older I wondered where was the Clash, Elvis Costello or the Jam. The show has always been completely out of touch with what is really happening. It's run by a bunch of old people who think they are hip and it's always been a turn off to young people. My kids only watched to diss the artists and wait for Green Day, unfortunately I sent them to bed before Green Day won ( isn't that record TWO years old already!).

Love your ideas about making the show inter-active and yes my kids can't watch TV without being on their lap tops as well. It's funny having two daughters people always ask if they are on the phone all the time. The answer is almost never, they are never on the phone yet they communicate with their friends more then I ever did with instant message, my space, etc. They are always in touch with their friends but they hardly ever speak to them using something as old school as a phone.

By: Dan Backhaus

Dan Backhaus — Sat, 11 Feb 2006 18:53:12 +0000

U2? That album came out almost 15 MONTHS ago, didn’t it? November 2004? Iwork in music and I don’t understand why it’s still eligible… What does the average person think? I understand the difference between "record" and "album", but if you asked 100 people on the street how many do you think would? The Grammy’s make sense to about 100 bigwigs… The same bigwigs who can’t load their own iPod, let alone backup their computer.

(I can’t comment on if the album is actually good or not. I’m a HUGE U2 fan but I’ve never heard the record. See, it was the last CD I ever purchased. I PURCHASED it… But for some reason it would never rip into my iTunes correctly… The only CD I’ve ever had a problem with. And because it isn’t on my iTunes it may as well not exist… I’ve never heard it.)