Say it ain't so, Grammy

A New York Times Magazine story several years ago suggested that it's time for men to reassess their priorities when, among other things, they no longer care who wins the Oscars.

How utterly asinine to think that caring who wins a golden statuette really makes a difference.

Everyone knows that it's when you no longer care who wins the Grammys that it's time to reassess your priorities.

News that the creme de la creme of the music industry were bested in the TV ratings this week by the variably talented warblers and mean-spirited critics of "American Idol" is distressing to those of us who grew up in ancient times, when music was actually good.

The 1970s.

OK, there are a few blips to that theory -- the Starland Vocal Band ("Afternoon Delight") did win "Best New Artist" in 1976 -- and Marvin Gaye was shut out that decade. Still, those were times when who sang, and who wore what, on the Grammys show was water-cooler or playground talk the next day. Honest, ask your parents.

This year, though, nearly twice as many people -- an estimated 28 million -- preferred watching Randy, Simon and Paula Abdul demean performers who, in a just world, would get no closer to being on television than walking past the security cameras at the mall.

I remember debating with a buddy while watching the Grammys in 1972 whether Gilbert O'Sullivan's "Alone Again (Naturally)" would win an award. His theory was that the song -- about a dude whose fiance left him literally at that altar, and whose dad and mom died -- was too depressing to win. He was right. And one time Reginald Wall and I fought because he thought the Jackson Five's rendition of "Never Can Say Goodbye" was better than Isaac Hayes' version.

The Grammys of '72 gave us one of the all-time great TV moments when Isaac Hayes, shrouded in gold chains, burst onto the stage and performed the "Theme from Shaft."

That was playground talk for days afterward. It's doubtful anyone is talking about the blond mohawk and silver robe that a befuddled-looking Sly Stone wore during a tribute to him and his band.

If the Grammys producers felt they had to reach into the '60s and '70s to find some relevancy, that could mean the show's fall from grace is simply because today's music stinks.

Nielsen Media Research reported that this was the least watched Grammys in decades. Perhaps half as many people watched the Grammys as tuned in to "Idol." They're more interested in seeing and hearing potential new stars than established ones. That way, they can say "I knew her before she was a star."

After all, former "Idol" winner Kelly Clarkson won a Grammy this week -- and then conspicuously failed to thank the show that launched her career. Do you reckon she knew it was on at the same time?

Another theory offered by some -- OK, just me -- is that with all of the entertainment shows, maybe people now yearn for (ahem!) anti-entertainment. Or maybe they just want to see people who are probably less talented than they are humiliate themselves before the nation.

Don't tell me there isn't at least a hint of sadism behind the popularity of "American Idol." For the 10 minutes that I've watched since it first aired, there was a certain comfort in knowing that I might be as talented as the guy desecrating "My Way" onstage.

Say what you will, Simon has never called my voice "a crime."