Yes, this year’s stable of Grammy nominees is a bit more diverse than last year’s, but there’s still a ton of room for improvement. Take, for instance, the category of Best Children’s Music Album. This year, the categories only recognized one woman and only white artists—Joanie Leeds, Alastair Moock And Friends, Dog On Fleas, Justin Roberts, and the Okee Dokee Brothers. Usually, something like this wouldn’t drum up much more than a dash of the public’s ire and, if we’re lucky, a self-serving speech from the winner. This time, according to Billboard (as first reported by Pitchfork), three of the five nominees have decided to take some action by formally asking the Recording Academy to rescind their nominations in a joint letter.
“We are deeply grateful to the Recording Academy and its voting members for the honor we’ve received,” wrote Alastair Moock & Friends, the Okee Dokee Brothers, and Dog On Fleas, “but we can’t in good conscience benefit from a process that has—both this year and historically—so overlooked women, performers of colors, and most especially Black performers.” The statement continues: “In the past 10 years, only about 6% of nominated acts have been Black-led or co-led, another 8% or so have been non-Black-POC-led, and around 30% have been female led. These numbers would be disappointing in any category, but—in a genre whose performers are unique tasked with modeling fairness, kindness, and inclusion; in a country where more than half of all children are non-white; and after a year of national reckoning around race and gender—the numbers are unacceptable.”
The remaining nominees, Joanie Leeds and Justin Roberts, decided to stay on the ballot, but expressed their support of their fellow nominees. Specifically, Leeds detailed that receiving a nomination as a woman is a feat that affects multiple people: “It’s also not just MY nomination. I share this with 20 other women including a female Latina producer and many females in the BIPOC community.” Recording Academy’s Chief Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Officer Valeisha Butterfield Jones released a statement in support and agreement with the artists choosing to give up their nominations. “Fostering more opportunities for women and people of color in the music community is one of the Recording Academy’s most urgent priorities,” Jones wrote to Pitchfork. “In launching the Black Music Collective and partnering with Color of Change, among other initiatives, we have been making progress and still have work left to do.” As of today, all five original nominees are still listed on the Recording Academy’s site and there is no word on anyone being removed from contention.
71 Comments
Really brave of them to throw away their chances at a major entertainment award like that.
In it’s defense it’s probably the cutest not to mention smallest of entertainment statues. Two of them would make adorable bookends.
Would that really be worth attending two Grammy ceremonies though?
Are the food and drink free?
“3 out of 420+ Grammy hopefuls reject nomination over category’s lack of inclusion”
Fixed that for you.
Grammys are generally a joke and have their own share of genuinely racist controversies, but should they really be obliged to have the one token diversity nomination in every single category?
This
strikes me as three artists no one has ever heard of, nominated for a
category nobody gives a shit about, trying to get their five minutes in
the spotlight using some good old woke virtue signalling.
“woke virtue signaling.”The stupidest possible three-word combination from the MAGA dicktionary.Which, to be fair, only consists of 40 stupid words.
Yes, yes, I used the big no-no word that the other internet meanies sometimes use. You are very astute, well done.
To be clear, it’s hard to take anybody unironically using “woke virtue signaling” seriously.
Plus actually doing a thing and following through with it as they did here isn’t really “virtue signalling”. They took action and did this.
Well you just confirmed my suspicions about you. Hm.
Oh no, it may have taken a solid half decade, but did I finally give Laserface his first receipt to follow me around with? 😂
Boy I can’t wait to have that trotted out against me just because I don’t sit and bitch about Zack Snyder in every single tangentially related thread.🙃
Sure dewd
It doesn’t have to be tangentially related. He’s adding your name and a link to his spreadsheet so the next time you say something he disagrees with, he can respond with “This from the person who thinks X.”
You named yourself after a band from Queensland? Man, the cane toads …
Boy I can’t wait to have that trotted out against me just because I don’t sit and bitch about Zack Snyder in every single tangentially related thread.Says the guy who randomly brought up Zack Snyder in an unrelated thread.See? You don’t need to explicitly tell us you are an asshole. Let your own narrative do the work.
I didn’t quite get why Snyder was brought into this randomly. It was weird and totally bro-ke virtue signalling for no reason.
He’s been obsessed with me because I criticized South Park…
> I don’t sit and bitch about Zack Snyder in every single tangentially related thread.Well, Snyder IS a terrible director….hey, you brought it up.
Wow, you’re slacking. I got his fascist attention within two weeks.
It’s the “big no-no word” because everyone who uses the phrase is a fucking moron.Your response confirms that you, too, are a fucking moron.
In fairness, if people couldn’t take offence at your choice of words then they’d have to thoughtfully respond to your objection.
Yes, yes, I used the big no-no word that the other internet meanies sometimes use. I mean, irrespective of politics, the concept itself is pretty fucking dumb. “Look at you, doing stuff. You’re only doing stuff cuz you want people to SEE you doing stuff, man.”There are a whole hell of a lot of us who aren’t out here chasing validation from total strangers, man.
It’s definitely a real thing, not just something MAGA asshats use.
It wasn’t much of a thing until MAGA asshats started mindlessly parroting such words every chance they got.
Let’s be clear that it consists of 40 stupid words and no other words. Not 40 stupid words and millions of smart words. 40 stupid words and no other words at all.
Cool – this would be meaningful if anyone anywhere cared what you think about anything.
Not even commenting on the efficacy of the demonstration but: not sure what you gain by accurately labeling this as virtue signaling…they’re intentionally virtue signaling because they hope other people will follow their model and act more virtuous…maybe you are thinking it’s virtue signaling where they ONLY want credit for being virtuous and don’t care if other people follow their lead? Despite their statement? a puzzler.
A somewhat cynical person might see it as a very easy opportunity for three extremely obscure bands, nominated for a category no one has ever heard of, to instantly make their name show up on the front page of every pop culture site on the internet.
Of course if there’s one thing the entertainment industry is known for, it’s their unabashed sincerity and genuine commitment to all social causes, so the idea of a band drumming up their own publicity is completely unheard of.
Are you assuming that because you don’t have a sincere commitment to social causes other people are pretending to as well? Or that this calculation of appearing on a few pop culture sites for one day is worth more in the industry than winning a grammy or not making sure they’ll never be nominated again? No matter what people joke about, winning a grammy is a big deal. It sounds more like you either just don’t care about what they care about or you don’t like people caring about things because it highlights that you don’t care about things, there is really no basis to question their sincerity.
But they’re not obscure bands just because you’ve never heard of them, and just because you’ve never heard of this category doesn’t mean no one has ever heard of it. They are, presumably, well-known within the genre that they play in. I doubt they’re trying to achieve crossover rock-stardom with this move.
If they wanted to be rich and famous that bad I don’t know if they’d be making children’s music. It seems weird to refer to them as “obscure bands”. People who make children’s music are pretty much never famous.
Probably not famous, but potentially rich. If there’s one thing kids are willing to do, it’s listen to the same thing over and over. But a Grammy may not be a big marketing tool for that market.
i never thought about that! all of those children’s music artists must indeed make oodles of money from streaming.of course, oodles of spotify money is exactly $2.67 but anyway….
Well, probably not “major rock star” rich, but I would think / hope that there’s a bunch of people in that genre making a comfortable living. As someone else pointed out in the thread, they might be big within their market, for all we know. We’re not *supposed* to know them.Of course almost everything else aimed at children is popular with a bunch of adults now, so maybe that’ll change.
Good point. And we all know the most cynical, money grabbing misers in the industry are these children’s performers. No doubt Lena Dunham an Michael Moore are buying Okee Dokee Brothers records by the box full now to blast on repeat in their child torture dungeon beneath Comet Ping Pong.
have the one token diversity nomination in every single category?
If you think the only way anyone other then white men can get nominated is as a “token” then you’re part of the problem.
Nah, I don’t think that.
“Toot Toot, Chugga Chugga, Go Fuck Yourself.” ~ The Wiggles
“This strikes me as a sad loser trying to feel better about himself by attempting to take down multi-Grammy-nominated artists because he’s really, really insecure about himself because all he wants is for someone to love him enough to grant him a child to whom he can play the albums of Dog on Fleas and the Okee Dokee Brothers.”
I feel the same way, Jakey. Nice of you to be so transparent about it, at least.
Of course, because the only way a minority can get a nomination is as a token, not as an actually deserving nominee. This is a good comment and you should be proud of it.
Yeah I’m sure this is gonna make the Okee Dokee Brothers a household name. Gonna make themselves all those Woke Bucks people keep spending.
kill yourself
wow. so the only way a BIPOC artist gets in is as a token? Only white male performers can be judged purely and objectively on their merits?
And half of mine rejected their Grammies nominations! Fingers crossed on the Grampies not being so controversial.
I keep telling you to drop the swimsuit portion of the show.
Raffi could not be reached for comment on the issue, as he is not answering his bananaphone.
In 2015, winning a Grammy meant an 87% jump in two-week sales for winners, according to Billboard.
It wouldn’t be surprising for the impact to be even bigger for children’s artists, who are always picking up new buyers who’ve never heard of them, but just need something kid-friendly to play around the house.
Not sure if you being sparky, but they will be lucky if they get mentioned on Awards Night (( which is the only thing that matters for the general public…if at all))
I know I always run out to buy the winner of the “Best Contemporary Polka Album”.
Are you talking shit about Jimmy Sturr and his Orchestra?
Heartaches By The Number – YouTubeAs a George Jones fan, honestly, it kind of slaps.
Holy shit this actually slaps.
As a Fallout: New Vegas fan…ehhhh.
Cardi B’s “WAP” should be nominated in every category.It’s the best children’s song. It’s the best spoken word album. It’s the best country song.
– The AV Club
If we’re going to talk inclusivity, could the Grammys perhaps start including good music?
A few notes on the article and their arguments -1) It is unlikely that any specific genre of music will mirror the national percentages on race and gender. Not impossible, but very unlikely.
2) While more than 50% of kids being born today in the USA may be non-white, that percentage does not apply to the older generations who are actually making the music. 3) If this is an award for best musician, then why does skin color or gender matter at all? How would nominating people who are not as good, but happen to be born with darker skin or a vagina, help decide who is the best?
3.) It shouldn’t. In an ideal world, all skin colors and genders would have been considered equally for years. But we don’t live in an ideal world, and for years, minority performers have been consistently overlooked. The idea of a true meritocracy is a dream, because it requires basically the entire history of minority groups being persecuted to be forgotten or to have never happened at all.
…You know, plus, awards are bullshit and subjective and decided upon by committees that bring their own politics/opinions/etc. to the voting. There’s no such thing as an objective award show.
I mostly agree with you. I just dont think this in particular is something where trying to make up for the past is helpful or good. If people feel there are not enough minorities or women getting these awards, then spend the time to encourage young women and people of color to enter the music business. Having whites drop out of contention (or having forced diversity nominations) just turns the whole award into a participation trophy without meaning. It devalues the award for whoever wins it, whether that be a minority or not.
I don’t want to win something if my win only came about because everyone else quit so I would have a big chance of winning.
“spend the time to encourage young women and people of color to enter the music business.”By showing that women and people of color who do enter the music business could be recognized for their excellence, perhaps!Nah, that’d never work…
But the issue (at least in part) is that “not enough minorities or women get these awards” does not necessarily mean “not enough minorities or women enter the music business.” The argument is that women and people of color are consistently overlooked for awards, public recognition, career advancement, etc. because of institutional racism. And you see it all over the comments on this article – the assumption that these 5 performers were objectively the best in their field in 2020 and that insisting that there are Black performers out there who also deserved a nomination means that you want to give Black performers a “participation trophy” is, in the absence of other evidence, racist.
It’s not about saying that every awards category in every industry has to be perfectly reflective of American demographics; it’s about saying that in a country as large and diverse as the United States, in a field as large and diverse as music, it’s a statistical impossibility for anything other than racism and sexism to explain how white men so dominate this category.
Grammies are theoretically merit-based…if you were nominated, it’s because you were the best in the field. Why are these people trippin’?
God forbid the Grammys nominees for best children’s music not be diverse enough. This does nothing for anyone. Who fucking cares? It pathetic to think someone deserves a nomination for something because of the color of their skin.
Don’t you have to just sell the most records in a category, to win its Grammy? I mean, we all know that Vanilla Ice’s Gregorian Grindcore was cultural appropriation, but come on. ‘Chant Pants’ is timeless.
eyeroll.gif
So now there’s even less diversity. Way to go?
If I listen to a song, I have no idea what the person looks like. I don’t know how they’re gendered, don’t know their race, or their sexual orientation. So what’s the problem here? Why try to look beyond that for more varied representation?
you’re asking this seriously? your question is actually ‘why does representation matter’?
Ideally it would be nice if there ended up being a wide representation after blind judging occurred, but yes, representation should have no bearing of the judging itself. Obviously, if there’s a deeper problem…labels won’t sign minorities for children’s music for example…that should be investigated and fixed. But there shouldn’t be quotas for an award that can be judged as close to blind as any award.
Whole lot of fucking racists in the AV Club commentariat these days. Whole lot of people who insist that they don’t see color too.
Half the U.S. population is female but since 2013, only 11.7% of Grammy nominations have gone to women. There is no physical reason why this disparity exists. It’s not like producing an album requires upper body strength. And yet, 98% of the credited music producers are men. If that’s not a red flag, I don’t know what is.