- The Academy Awards are facing backlash after rearranging Sunday’s ceremony to present Best Actor at the end, only to snub anticipated winner Chadwick Boseman of the prize.
- Many believe the show’s producers put the award last to end the night on a tribute to the late actor, but their plan backfired when Anthony Hopkins, who was not there to accept the trophy, won.
- Many described the build-up to this bait-and-switch as “a slap in the face” to those eagerly waiting to honor Boseman’s legacy.
- Most of the remaining top prizes of the night went to “Nomadland,” which took home Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Actress.
Chadwick Boseman Snubbed
The Academy Awards are facing backlash after ending Sunday’s show by snubbing the late Chadwick Boseman of the coveted Best Actor title.
Going into the show, Boseman’s win for his formidable performance in “Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom” felt like a sure thing. When the Academy opted to break tradition and give out the top prize, Best Picture, earlier in the telecast, viewers felt confident the choice was made so the ceremony could end on a touching tribute to Boseman for his Best Actor win.
Then the moment finally came and presenter Juaquin Phoenix announced Anthony Hopkins, who was not even there to accept the statue, as the winner for his acclaimed work in “The Father.” With no speech to air, the show abruptly ended.
Many watching felt disappointed by this finale, as there was seemingly an intentional build-up to Boseman’s win that backfired tremendously. While the show overall was slightly chaotic and more experimental than the average Oscars, the decision to not air Best Picture last felt incredibly deliberate, and so did replacing it with a category that many viewers were invested in watching because they expected a moment honoring an actor whose life ended too soon.
Academy Faces Backlash
Many online have condemned the show and its producers and accused it of exploiting Boseman’s death for views.
In that line of criticism, many are also pointing to the fact that Chadwick Boseman artwork redeemable as an NFT was included in the show’s swag bag. Many thought that after not giving him an award, this was an insensitive addition of insult to injury.
Others made it clear that they had no ill-will towards Hopkins, who has since accepted the Oscar in an Instagram video and acknowledged the life of Boseman in his speech. Many said it was instead the structure of the snub that felt like “a slap in the face.”
“It’s the way it played out,” screenwriter LaToya Morgan wrote. “The build up… the let down. Chaos achievement: unlocked.”
In Memoriam Segment Criticized
Because he did not win, there was never a moment that thoroughly honored Boseman’s work and life, other than the photo of him that briefly aired at the end of the show’s in memoriam, which is separately facing its own wave of backlash. The segment was incredibly quick, was set to an upbeat song, and included no clips from films made by the many icons who were lost in the past year. It only quickly flashed photos that barely provided the audience with enough time to read each person’s name.
It also excluded big names, including actors like Naya Rivera and Jessica Walters, and Oscar-nominated musician Adam Schlesinger.
In a year defined by so much loss, many found it disrespectful to run through the in memoriam section and not give viewers a chance to sit with the tragic losses that have occured, Boseman included.
See what others are saying: (The Hollywood Reporter) (E! News) (USA Today)
Senators Introduce Legislation Requiring Radios to Pay Royalties to Artists
Sen. Padilla argued the bill is necessary to give artists the “dignity and respect they deserve.”
The American Music Fairness Act
Sens. Alex Padilla (D-CA) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) introduced the American Music Fairness Act to the Senate on Thursday, a bill that would require radio stations to pay royalties to performers and rights holders.
The bill was previously introduced to the House last year. According to a release, the United States is the only democratic country where artists are not compensated for their music’s use on AM or FM radio. While songwriters and publishers receive payment, these stations have never been required to give a slice of the pie to performers and copyright holders.
On streaming and satellite radio, however, both groups receive royalty payments.
In a statement, Padilla said it is time the country starts treating “our musical artists with the dignity and respect they deserve for the music they produce and we enjoy every day.”
“California’s artists have played a pivotal role in enriching and diversifying our country’s music scene,” he added. “That is why passing the American Music Fairness Act is so important.”
“From Beale Street to Music Row to the hills of East Tennessee, the Volunteer State’s songwriters have undeniably made their mark,” Blackburn echoed. “Tennessee’s creators deserve to be compensated for their work. This legislation will ensure that they receive fair payment and can keep the great hits coming.”
The American Music Fairness Act would require terrestrial radio broadcasters to pay royalties to music creators when their songs are played. It would also protect smaller stations that either make less than $1.5 million in annual revenue or who have a parent company that makes less than $10 million in annual revenue by letting them play unlimited music for under $500 a year.
The bill would also require other countries to pay American artists for the use of their work.
Support From Major Music Groups
The legislation is endorsed by a number of groups, including the Recording Academy, SAG-AFTRA, and the American Federation of Musicians.
If passed, the bill could move a lot of money into the pockets of performers. According to the Recording Academy, when American music gets international airplay, other countries collect royalties for American artists, amounting to around $200 million every year. However, they “never pay those royalties because the U.S. does not reciprocate with our own performance right.”
Fran Drescher, President of SAG-AFTRA, argues that the money belongs to the artists.
“Broadcast companies profit from advertising sales because of the creative content musicians and singers record. It stands to reason that the performers who create the content deserve to be compensated just as songwriters are now,” Drescher said in a statement. “The reason it’s called the American Music Fairness Act is because the current situation is wholly unfair and it’s up to Congress to make it fair NOW!”
Last year, Representatives Steve Womack (R-AR) and Kathy Castor (D-FL) introduced the Local Radio Freedom Act, a bill with essentially the opposite agenda. It aims to reserve radio’s royalty-free status. The American Music Fairness Act is being viewed as a counter-response to this bill.
Kanye West Says Catalog Is Potentially Being Sold Without His Permission: “Just Like Taylor Swift”
After Swift lost the rights to her life’s work, she took on the endeavor of re-recording her first six albums.
Kanye’s Catalog Potentially Up For Grabs
Following reports that Kanye West was considering selling his catalog, the artist took to Instagram on Tuesday to claim his work is potentially being sold without his approval.
On Monday, Billboard reported that West had been “quietly and intermittently shopping his publishing catalog.”
While the outlet’s sources did not reveal what price West was aiming for, Billboard estimated that West might be looking at a $175 million valuation for his discography. Some of Billboard’s sources seemingly suggested that West and his team were specifically behind the effort to sell his work, but others claimed the “catalog was never actively shopped” and instead, West had been receiving offers from potential buyers.
Not long after, several news outlets picked the story up and reported that West was gearing up to sell his catalog. West responded by writing on his Instagram story that this was not the case.
“Not For Sale”
“Just like Taylor Swift,” he said, referencing music mogul Scooter Braun purchasing Swift’s masters with Big Machine Records without her approval. “My publishing is being put up for my sale without my knowledge. Not for sale.”
Swift referred to the sale of her masters to Braun as her “worst case scenario.” In order to regain ownership of her work, she is in the process of re-recording her first six albums, all of which she originally made under Big Machine. Two have already been released and proved to be wildly commercially successful.
According to Forbes, it is unclear which of his albums West owns the masters to, if he owns any at all. Because of this, it is unknown what kind of position he would be put in if his catalog, which is currently managed by Sony, was sold.
The status of any potential for his work to be sold became foggier later on Tuesday when West shared screenshots of a text exchange he had. He asked an unidentified person what was happening with the catalog sale, and that person responded by calling it “fake news.”
“Of course every publisher wants to pitch [their] hardest buy, smh,” the text continued.
West did not further indicate if those texts were meant to clarify that his catalog was, in fact, not up for sale, or just further distance himself from any potential acquisition.
“Squid Game” Director Defends Reality Spinoff of Hit Series Amid Backlash
“When you take things too seriously, that’s really not the best way to go for the entertainment industry,” the Emmy-winner said.
“Squid Game” To Get Reality Treatment
Emmy Award-winning “Squid Game” director Hwang Dong-hyuk addressed the mounting backlash a reality spinoff of the popular series is facing while speaking to reporters at the Emmy Awards on Monday night.
“Squid Game” quickly became Netflix’s most-watched series following its release last fall. In a searing examination of capitalism and class division, the South Korean drama follows people who choose to compete in schoolyard-style games with life or death stakes in hopes of winning enough money to pay their debts off.
Over the summer, Netflix announced plans to make a reality series based on the games featured in the show called “Squid Game: The Challenge.” Just like in “Squid Game,” 456 contestants will compete for a prize of $4.56 million. Though in this case, losers will not be executed. Netflix is billing the program as “the biggest reality competition ever.”
The announcement of the show was met with swift backlash from those who felt a reality adaptation of these games missed the point of the original series. Some even argued it felt dystopian to have real people participate in a cash-grab game based on media meant to highlight the tragedies surrounding poverty and desperation.
Hwang Responds to Criticism
While speaking in the Emmy’s press room following a successful night for the breakout series, Hwang said he understood where some of the criticisms were coming from but defended the reality series.
“I think that even though our show does carry quite a heavy message — and I know that there are some concerns of taking that message and creating it into a reality show with a cash prize,” he said via Variety. “However, I feel like when you take things too seriously, that’s really not the best way to go for the entertainment industry. It doesn’t really set a great precedent.”
“I would say that reproductions of such efforts are going to bring new meaning to the industry, and I hope that this is going to be a great new direction for the industry overall,” the director continued.
“Squid Game” won six Emmy awards including Hwang’s trophy for Outstanding Directing For a Drama Series and Lee Jung-jae’s victory for Outstanding Actor in a Drama Series.
No release date for “Squid Game: The Challenge” has been released yet, but it is set to film in the United Kingdom.