Grammy Awards Get Lowest Rating Since '95

Placebo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Feb-14-05 08:17 PM
Original message

Grammy Awards Get Lowest Rating Since '95

From J.Lo to James Brown, Usher to U2, the Grammys had it all this year — except a lot of interested viewers. An estimated 18.8 million people watched Ray Charles' swan song clean up with eight awards Sunday night, a startling 28 percent drop from the 2004 Grammys.

After two years on an upswing, Grammy ratings sunk to their lowest level since 1995, according to Nielsen Media Research. It may be an ominous sign for the granddaddy of awards shows, the Academy Awards, Feb. 27 on ABC.

People at CBS and elsewhere in the industry were somewhat perplexed by the numbers on Monday, given that the show was jam-packed with performances and star power.

"This was the show to beat in terms of how it was produced," said Shari Anne Brill, a television analyst for Carat USA. "It was just great. It wasn't about someone handing out awards. It was about performances. Viewers who didn't tune in missed a treat."

More...

ha, Ha, HA, HA!!! I have a feeling I missed nothing by not tuning in, much less a "treat!"

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

donco6

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Feb-14-05 08:20 PM
Response to Original message

1. One word: ZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Who cares about the Grammy's? I would probably AVOID a grammy-winner when considering what to buy at Best Buy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RevolutionaryActs

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Feb-14-05 08:20 PM
Response to Original message

2. My highlights: Franz Ferdinand as part of the opening show and

and Green Day kicking so much ass! :headbang:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

tjdee

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Feb-14-05 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #2

4. Heck yeah, I decided the lead singer is one of my boyfriends.

Edited on Mon Feb-14-05 08:23 PM by tjdee

:silly:

Hadn't seen them live before, MUCH better than on that video. Totally different vibe, actually. Will give them a second listen.

Btw, Nicholas Nickelby!
:cry:

Haven't gotten to Deathwatch yet.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RevolutionaryActs

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Feb-14-05 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #4

7. No! Mine!

We share? :silly:

I know Nicholas Nickelby! :cry:

Go watch Deathwatch now and report back! :P

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

tjdee

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Feb-14-05 08:20 PM
Response to Original message

3. It was one of the more exciting ones in recent years.

Edited on Mon Feb-14-05 08:24 PM by tjdee

I mean, the opening number was a good concept (if not a LOT of Black Eyed Peas), the Melissa Etheridge/Joss Stone tribute to Janis Joplin was great, U2 delivered as usual, Alicia Keys did wonderfully (and I usually can't stand her)....

It was one of the more interesting ones I've seen in the past five years at least, overall.

In general, though, the Grammys have sucked for a long time.

OH--but the Ray Charles worship was getting a bit thick in there, IMO. Jiminy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Leftist78

(609 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Feb-14-05 08:22 PM
Response to Original message

5. it sucked

I always have a lot of gripes about the grammys, bunch of corporate shills giving out awards to bands signed by the big 5 and ignoring the indie labels or giving them some small time nomination or award. I believe I'll drop dead if an indie band gets best album any time in the near future.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LostInAnomie

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Feb-14-05 08:22 PM
Response to Original message

6. Why would I want to waste hours of my time...

... watching a bland, mediocre, crap fest?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Guy Fawkes

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Feb-14-05 08:25 PM
Response to Original message

8. Those were on...?

oh well...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

tishaLA

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Feb-14-05 08:43 PM
Response to Original message

9. Latifah tries to sing "Lush Life" live....

and a tsunami relief song is sung similarly off key. And the ratings tank? Color me shocked, SHOCKED, shocked!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

elperromagico

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Feb-14-05 08:49 PM
Response to Original message

10. It's ONLINE DOWNLOADING that's to blame for this!!!

After all, why would you spend three hours watching the awards when you can just download a list of the winners off the Internet in less than a minute?!?

This message brought to you by the good people at the RIAA. :hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Placebo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Feb-14-05 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #10

12. So true!

The only awards show I watch anymore is the Academy Awards. :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

linazelle

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Feb-14-05 08:58 PM
Response to Original message

11. The musical acts were outstanding: Alicia Keys, Kanye West,

the opening act was a good concept but nearly went overboard, Jamie Fox, Bono...I didn't watch it all but these acts were great. I taped it and I'm fast forwarding through it now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Thu May 02nd 2024, 11:37 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.