Grammys Ceremony Like a Terrible Curse That Ruins Even Good Ideas


There’s been a lot of post-Grammys snark around the interblogs, and of course there were a million things to hate about last night’s broadcast. So here I am, trying to think of a “Top 5 Good Things About the Grammys” post; you know, “accentuate the positive” and all that. But I can’t do it. Every time I think of something halfway decent that happened on the seemingly endless broadcast last night, I remember something that disqualifies it. Take, for instance, Kanye and Daft Punk. A funky, jazzed-up combo performance by the eccentric rapper and the French techno duo, followed by a heartfelt ode to Kanye’s mom: what could go wrong? But the imitation Daft Punk pyramid looked like it was made out of cardboard, and its goofy game-show-reminiscent opening-up to reveal the duo in their light-trimmed suits just looked cheap. Right afterwards, Kanye sang his heart out, but they had to accompany his performance with a laughably cheesy projection of a slo-mo angel; did they think the “MAMA” shaved into the back of Kanye’s head wasn’t going to be a big enough clue?

The best part of the Grammys, Amy Winehouse, wasn’t even there: her winking, energetic performance of “You Know I’m No Good” and “Rehab” took place at an intimate London club, done up with little lamps like a cabaret. While the reason for the “remote” was lack of a travel visa, it seemed like a tacit acknowledgement by the producers that everything done inside the arena was going to suck.

Can I at least talk about one of the things I completely hated? Please? Okay: NARAS president Neil Portnow, seemingly trying to soften up his image after last year’s stern “don’t download, kids!” speech, gave this year’s still-pretty-ornery (and self-serving) soliloquy accompanied by the lilting sounds of Eldar on the piano. Like, maybe I won’t be offended by your attempt to tie your cause to the writers’ strike if there’s soothing new age tinkling in the background? Arrrgh! And I’m going to shut up now before I start talking about “Professor” will.i.am’s Grammys-history “rap.”

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate

Share your feedback: We’re planning to launch a new version of the comments section. Help us test it.