The controversy of the Grammys

When talking about the Grammys, most people’s minds tend to think about music, dresses and celebrities. What they don’t think about is energy consumption, bias and unrealistic expectations. Though admittedly not as exciting, these things are just as important to consider when the awaited award show comes around. 

It’s a fun time to have a vague, background expectation about each year’s Grammys. It’s even more exciting when you have a favorite artist up for an award. But how much do people—specifically college students—really care about the award at all? 

Michael Howard (‘28), a music minor at Maryville College, said that despite being so heavily ingrained into the music world at MC, the award show doesn’t seem to be much of a big deal at all from a peer to peer perspective. 

“I’m not sure I’ve ever had a conversation with my friends about the Grammys.” 

Howard also said that he thinks the Grammys can be a bit of a double edged sword for young musicians. 

 “Giving an award to the highest achieving musicians is a good concept, however I also see how it can discourage people due to how locked off the upper echelons of music is.” 

This poses the question of what, really, is the point of the Grammys? If it’s not encouraging young musicians, if they’re not even watching the awards, why continue to make it such a grand event? Perhaps they shouldn’t. 

There are a total of 94 categories in the Grammys, yet chances are most people can only name the “big ones” such as Album of the Year, Artist of the Year, and Best New Artist. Professor of Music Dr. Bill Swann, who has a Master of Music in Jazz Studies, gave his opinion on the matter.

 “The categories that are highly publicized are usually the ones that are primarily commercial in nature, i.e., trying to sell/appeal to the broadest number of consumers), whereas the untelevised categories are already selling so few recordings each year that there’s not as many conflicting interests to cloud the judging of them.”

Regarding the question of if the Grammys does the jazz and other less mainstream categories justice, Swann said it was to be expected that the award show only highlights some.

“It’s okay that the televised portion of the Grammys focuses on a small number of performers who sell huge numbers of recordings each year, because it is simply reflecting what people are buying, not necessarily what is most important, worthy or interesting. Jazz used to be the most popular music in the country, but it isn’t anymore and the Grammy Awards simply reflect that.” 

 It does not seem very far-fetched to say that it’s possible the award is simply for the most media driven artist based on their fan base and sales rather than overall musical talent.  

It appears that every year, the interest in the Grammys lessens, with viewership declining steadily for the past decade. But it’s not only us viewers who have opted to stay off the Grammy bandwagon in recent years, but the artists too. 

The Weeknd, Justin Bieber, Drake and Frank Ocean are just a handful of the many artists that have openly criticized the Grammys for not giving them the recognition they felt they deserved, putting them into the wrong category, or not being a place that represents artists from all walks of life.These are all very valid concerns for artists and viewers to have. On the other hand, there seems to be quite a few things the Grammys does in order to be as sustainable and diverse as possible.

With the rapid wildfires raging across California, there was talk of whether or not the Grammys would even happen this year. And even though they made the choice to continue on as scheduled, the Grammys is shifting the focus of the award to raising awareness and relief efforts for the fires. 

Adrienne Schwarte, the coordinator for the Sustainability Minor at Maryville College, had an insightful perspective on the sustainability aspect of the award show.

“Personally, I find the Grammys to be one of the more sustainability and diversity-minded events of the prestigious and glamorous awards. In past years, the Grammys have focused on trying to create a more sustainable event.”

“They have identified areas where they can be more sustainable, such as partnering with the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) to reduce their environmental impact at the Staples Center (now called the Crypto.com Arena) by utilizing renewable energy, offsetting carbon emissions promoting recycling and waste reduction and integrating hybrid and energy efficient vehicles for arrivals and event transportation needs.”

Maintaining sustainability is not the only thing the Grammys has worked towards, but it seems they’ve made efforts to create a diverse and comfortable experience for those involved. That is, from the perspective of audiences looking in from the outside. 

“This year, the Grammys were able to exceed their goal of 2,500 women voters by 2025 with a number just over 3,000,” Schwarte said. 

The Grammys does release a voting members report, giving information on the demographics of the current voting party. Since 2024, these numbers seem to have changed drastically, and the Grammys are now seeing more women and more people of color being a part of the voting membership.

It is encouraging to see these changes that the Grammys are making, and while some viewers and participants may still wish to see change within the award show, everyday efforts are made to keep the award show inclusive and accessible for all. 

And who knows, maybe one day an artist of our very own from Maryville College will stand up and gladly accept Artist of The Year.