FEATURE: Shortlists: Creating a Single, All-Inclusive Music Award Show in the U.K.

FEATURE:

 

 

Shortlists

IN THIS PHOTO: Wet Leg, who won the Breakthrough Artist, and British Group awards at the recent BRITs/PHOTO CREDIT: Diana King for Billboard

 

Creating a Single, All-Inclusive Music Award Show in the U.K.

_________

 

I will cast my mind…

 IN THIS PHOTO: Charli XCX/PHOTO CREDIT: Getty Images

back a couple of weeks or so. This month has seen big award ceremonies in the U.S. and U.K. The GRAMMYs in America, and the BRITs here celebrated the best and brightest in music. A couple of things were highlighted at the BRITs. Whilst the GRAMMYs were more diverse and gender-equal than previous years, the BRITs struggled to respond to criticism that their Artist of the Year category featured no women. Also, being held on a Saturday night, it did not pull enough younger viewers away from other options. A lot shorter than the GRAMMYs, I think it lacks the authority of the U.S. ceremony. In terms of the number of categories and the general pull of the event, the BRITs seems less important. I want to suggest a move when it comes to combining the music award shows we have in the U.K. Writing in The Guardian Alexis Petridis discussed Harry Styles’ triumphant night. He also made a point that, as a lot of his audience are teens, they were probably not tuned in to the BRITs and watching him scoop four awards:

Without wishing to sound hopelessly unpatriotic, the Brits is an awards ceremony that exists in the shadow of the Grammys. It almost invariably takes place a week or so after the US Recording Academy doles out its gongs in a ceremony that’s bigger, more star-studded and with more impact than the Brits can ever hope for, not least because the public seem to have rather more investment in who wins. Declining interest in the Brits is something you suspect even its organisers are aware of: you can detect an urge to drum up more attention in this year’s decision to shift the ceremony from midweek to a Saturday for the first time.

And sometimes, the US awards just foreshadow what’s going to happen at the Brits: from the moment Harry Styles snatched the album of the year Grammy from under Beyoncé’s nose, you somehow knew he was going to sweep the board in London. And so it proved.

He went home with virtually everything bar the onstage Autocue: best artist, best album, best song and best pop/R&B act. For good measure, his chief collaborator Kid Harpoon got best songwriter: there was always the chance the British Phonographic Industry gave it to him for his work on acclaimed US singer-songwriter Maggie Rogers’ second album rather than the multimillion-selling, No 1-in-27-countries Harry’s House, but you wouldn’t bank on it.

How moving the Brits to a Saturday was supposed to lure its target market away from social media and on-demand streaming – or indeed just going out with their mates – is an intriguing question. You rather got the feeling that most of this years’ viewers might have been old enough to remember the days when the Brits seemed to give Annie Lennox an award every year, and that they might have spent the evening asking “who’s that?” whenever 2023’s stars appeared. Which can’t possibly be the Brits’ desired effect”.

I disagree with those who say that award ceremonies are pointless. There is merit in recognising merit. I don’t think ceremonies are corporate or they only recognise the most commercial artists. Saluting brilliant artists, albums and songs is important. I think a problem here is that we have a few on the calendar that could be rolled into one. One reason why the GRAMMYS succeeds is because it has a lot of categories. You are covering the spread and, by and large, there are not too many notable omissions. The BRITs have been criticised for having a category that lumps in Pop and R&B without including R&B. The Mercury Prize solely salutes the best album from a U.K. or Irish artist from the past year. I guess it is good to have award ceremonies like that, and NME’s annual bash. I just feel like there could be one that covers everything. Including most genres, several album prizes (including best debut), E.P., film soundtrack, music video, breakthrough artist, icon, best live tour, and so forth. It would rival the GRAMMYs in terms of its completeness and, hopefully, be more inclusive when it comes to gender and genre. I know each award ceremony has their own identity and vibe, but there is scope to have a one-stop British award night that recognises all the best and brightest. Maybe it is hard to completely win teen audiences, but something can be worked out.

I get the feeling the likes of the BRITs will continue to slip when it comes to things like gender equality and recognising genres like R&B. So many artists get missed from award ceremonies, so broadening the categories in terms of the number shortlisted would be a god idea. Rather than five or so artists being shortlisted, having seven-nine in each category would mean less exclusion. When it comes to albums, there is too much to choose from to be quite narrow and stingy! I think that, if you have a genderless category like Artist of the year, widening that to seven or eight shortlisted and ensuring that there are women included eliminates the problem the BRITs created. As much as anything, it would allow for musical performances and a night to rival the GRAMMYS. It is a shame that there is backlash against any award ceremony, because they are meant to be celebrations. Maybe one held in the spring at the Eventim Apollo that is longer and more inclusive than the likes of the BRITs, NME, and other award ceremonies would solve a lot of issues. It would be interesting to see! Whatever the solution, criticisms and genuine concerns need to be taken on board. Ensuring women are not excluded, that genres are not lumped together as an afterthought, and having a diverse range of categories is essential. Let’s hope that one way or another, next year’s award ceremonies here…

ARE free from exclusion.