It turns out the the latest Emmy Awards show had terrible ratings. Most experts point to the fact that so many of the shows up for awards have limited audiences (Arrested Development and all those shows on HBO, for example) or are on the way out. One could probably add that the Emmys have lately been among the worst awards shows (and that’s saying something). This year was no exception with Gary Shandling giving a pretty forgettable performance.
But the Emmys has another problem. A large portion of the viewing audience will always be wildly disappointed in their picks. For years, television connoisseurs have cringed as the network stars took home the statues over their cable counterparts starring in such ridiculously good shows as Sex and the City, Six Feet Under and The Sopranos. It was just too absurd. TV addicts had to avert their eyes.
And just went they looked away, all of their shows won. The trouble is, as mentioned above, fewer people watch those shows and are familiar with those stars (which is, ultimately, a crime against media humanity).
But here’s a weird idea. If television connoisseurs and those who give the Emmys all finally agree that great TV is better than crap TV, then why doesn’t everyone just start making better shows? I’m sure those who like the crappy stuff would learn to come around.