The Grammys really Did Use BTS tho (1 Viewer)

[VillageIdiot]

​

 

[LeeHoseok]

They really didn't, but I mean, keep thinking that? They were never gonna win, ever, so that's not why they were there. The Recording Academy asks the most popular artists, BTS agreed to be there, so they obviously didn't care. They didn't have to agree to perform at all. I've never seen a fandom play the victim this hard before. It's really cringey, tbh. They weren't used, they just didn't win. That happens.

 

[brekker]

I don´t think we can talk about "BTS agreed to ... " it was most likely their company but I´m getting the drift. I also think it was something that benefited both parties. BTS is popular so of course them being there drew a lot of youngish fans into Grammys, but they are still not THAT popular in the States so why not milk such an opportunity.
My heart bleeds watching them doing SO MUCH these days. They seem to never sleep. They perform, they upload their vlogs, they do a lot of fanservice etc. I just hope no one of them breaks down of it.

 

[Strawberry_Poppy]

You gotta make money.
Its their business

 

[VillageIdiot]

They really didn't, but I mean, keep thinking that? They were never gonna win, ever, so that's not why they were there. The Recording Academy asks the most popular artists, BTS agreed to be there, so they obviously didn't care. They didn't have to agree to perform at all. I've never seen a fandom play the victim this hard before. It's really cringey, tbh. They weren't used, they just didn't win. That happens.

The condescending tone is unnecessary but whatever.

They kept teasing that BTS's performance was "coming up next" the whole night while deliberately putting them at the end to maintain viewership. Didn't do that for any other act and if that's not a blatant grab for views, I don't know what is. Which is pretty cheap to do to an artist you snubbed and not the first the Grammys have been called out for doing that

 

[Administrator2]

Question. Why would Grammys need views?

 

[QueenGirlCrush]

Kpop is mainly built on fandoms and creating an idealized relationship/fantasy to gain popularity. Musicianship and artistry are not the top priority. How much that is depends on the group and there are a minority of groups that do not do that. But that is the industry standard, so why are fans surprised when other parts of the music industry see that and treat their groups accordingly?

In essence if Kpop wants to be treated like a serious musical genre/style (Teddy even said it isn’t even a genre) on the world stage it needs to restructure.

 

[VillageIdiot]

Question. Why would Grammys need views?

How much merit and importance do you give something that nobody watches or considers important?

 

[Administrator2]

How much merit and importance do you give something that nobody watches or considers important?

Grammys are an established and renowned recording academy, so to speak, just like The Oscars. They don't need YouTube views or certain fandoms clicks to earn merit. They ARE merit to others. Less and less as the years go by, but nonetheless.

 

[QueenGirlCrush]

How much merit and importance do you give something that nobody watches or considers important?

I watched a couple of videos that said the views were decreasing. Mainly because people began to spot the back door politics and too many artist just straight up outed them.

TBH BTS may really want a Grammy but I think Big Hit is just using them for the views and prestige. Which is a great move, BTS is already successful without them.

 

[AmysTeri]

Spoiler: Viewership Ramblings

Slight non-sequitur, but on the topic of viewership, consider this: a lot of people just go online after the fact to watch performances by groups they actually like rather than watch real-time and stick it out throughout the entire show. Twitter/SM engagement may make it seem otherwise, but their views plummeted again this year.

Also considering falling views, see controversy re: The Weeknd (most notably) and other artists either outright boycotting the institution itself (as in the former) or declining to perform there (as multiple artists did this year). We may see it as some small thing, but small things can gain traction and become something big.

Also, as far as established, "prestigious" institutions go, consider something like the Golden Globes and this tweet:


I mean, it would take more than K-Pop fans and their "outrage" to make a dent in something like the Grammys, but if enough Western artists/their companies make such a statement, then...

And again, while a Grammy is still an achievement that is sought by some artists and their fans, it is, indeed, becoming something that's increasingly seem as "bought" and therefore irrelevant. Then again, Western fans, like K-Pop fans, flip-flop on this stance depending on whether or not someone they like won, lol......

*Ahem* But as to the topic at hand -- well, since BTS hit the Western award show scene and people (companies, Western celebs, etc.) saw their insane fan engagement and fan dedication, they keyed into the sheer profitability of having BTS on their platforms. Both BH/BTS and these various Western circuits benefit from these platforms. So, did they invite BTS for the views? Most definitely. They're a business, lol. If people aren't watching your stuff, as time goes on, less companies will buy an ad spot or pay as much money for ad space, etc. etc. Did BH media-play the hell out of Dynamite? Absolutely. Did Dynamite make numbers? Of course! Do BTS deserve to be where they are? Yeah, just as much as anybody else there, really. Did BTS benefit from this Grammy run? Sure. As with each case, they'll lose some and gain others, but at the very least they will maintain.

Were BTS robbed? As I said in a previous thread, Grammy's are voted on by a panel of music industry "peers," period. There was no guaranteed win for anybody up there. And honestly, in this case, the "robbed" narrative bothers me because it implies that every other song in that category wasn't a contender by content (because the Grammy isn't awarded by a specified metric), and that's insulting to the other artists.

Sorry I rambled. I need to be sleeping.

 

[VillageIdiot]

Grammys are an established and renowned recording academy, so to speak, just like The Oscars. They don't need YouTube views or certain fandoms clicks to earn merit. They ARE merit to others. Less and less as the years go by, but nonetheless.

The Grammys reputation has been decreasing over the years as they've continued to prioritize politics and snub deserving artists, particularly POCs. It's still a serious institution but as you said, declining.

Viewership has always mattered, especially in an era where television is rapid declining. There's a reason why they make it an effort to make a show of it and constantly get called out for using artists for ratings. They still tried to get SZA and The Weeknd to perform for them despite robbing them of nominations. Having low and continually declining viewership, artists accepting their awards while slamming the Grammys and talking about who really deserved the awards in their speeches and media constantly questioning the validity of the award doesn't really speak well on the academy. The Grammys have already entered a point where viewers are more interested in the acts and the performances than the actual awards, which The Oscars haven't fallen to yet.

 

[blueberries]

Are they saying that cause just BTS didnt win or is there more to it? i dont think there was any guarantee they would win.

 

[VillageIdiot]

Are they saying that cause just BTS didnt win or is there more to it? i dont think there was any guarantee they would win.

Not so much the win but how they tried to keep fans watching for the entire event

 

[RandAlThor]

The Grammys reputation has been decreasing over the years as they've continued to prioritize politics and snub deserving artists, particularly POCs. It's still a serious institution but as you said, declining.

Viewership has always mattered, especially in an era where television is rapid declining. There's a reason why they make it an effort to make a show of it and constantly get called out for using artists for ratings. They still tried to get SZA and The Weeknd to perform for them despite robbing them of nominations. Having low and continually declining viewership, artists accepting their awards while slamming the Grammys and talking about who really deserved the awards in their speeches and media constantly questioning the validity of the award doesn't really speak well on the academy. The Grammys have already entered a point where viewers are more interested in the acts and the performances than the actual awards, which The Oscars haven't fallen to yet.

lol i have not watched either in decades. long ago they failed the credibility test.
Actually a Grammy or an Oscar makes me less likely to check out a project.

 

[blueberries]

Not so much the win but how they tried to keep fans watching for the entire event

Makes sense

In other hand they are providing content for fans and hyping it up. But i get being skeptical and thinking they and army were used for numbers.

 

[Lovely_Cornchips]

I can see both sides of the arguments with this so I'm on the fence.

 

[bulletproof]

I'm not surprised tbh, there are lots of things wrong with Grammys noawadays

 

[LeeHoseok]

The condescending tone is unnecessary but whatever.

They kept teasing that BTS's performance was "coming up next" the whole night while deliberately putting them at the end to maintain viewership. Didn't do that for any other act and if that's not a blatant grab for views, I don't know what is. Which is pretty cheap to do to an artist you snubbed and not the first the Grammys have been called out for doing that

Is this your first time watching the Grammys? They literally do that every. single. year. with the top performer. They didn't pull that trick out of nowhere just for BTS, most awards shows do it. Fans expect BTS to perform last at Korean shows because they're the biggest draw, why suddenly think it'd be different now? Also, being nominated isn't a guarantee. There is no "snubbing" when the organization has a shadowy system for choosing winners based on voting members and secretive panels of judges. The thing is, you'd be hard pressed to find sympathy from non-ARMY. Others were telling fans not to expect BTS to win but were always met with an absolute air of superiority that oh, of COURSE BTS would win and everyone was just jealous, but when they lost the narrative was immediately switched. The Grammys, as I've said on this forum previously, are no more legit than any other awards show. They just had better PR & marketing until recently.


No one was mad about how the game was played until it impacted them.
The Grammys are either legit, or they aren't, not whichever works with your running narrative.

 

[eclipsoul]

i mean last year the grammys couldn't even bother to properly spell people's names in the "in memoriam" section out of all places so what is there to expect from them. in all seriousness though, i guess i understand where both sides are coming from. i didn't care much for the grammys this time other than folklore winning AOTY but if i was watching this waiting for bts to perform i'd be a bit annoyed for them to say "bts is up next" only to wait much longer and have them go home empty handed. but then again, it's not the first and probably not the last time something like this happens. obviously having a lot of viewers is important for television, this is business so they will do what they need to do for that to happen. also there is no way to determine how exactly dynamite was "robbed". grammys aren't based on sales or popularity so even if i personally would love dynamite to win that category, there are no actual reasons why it deserved that win more than rain on me.