Emmys 2014: Rethinking The Nomination Process

By Julia Bianco on July 12, 2014

The Emmys are some of the most prestigious awards given in television, so naturally the nominees should comprise of the best and the brightest that today’s TV has to offer, right? Not quite.

Photo by Nasa HQ Photo on Flickr.com

This year’s Emmy nominations, which were released on Thursday, July 10, were a good showing of the process’ many flaws, with many worthy shows and actors getting snubbed due to the outdated system. However, there were also many pleasant surprises this year, which show that the process may have some hope of reform after all.

For those who don’t already know, Emmy nominations for prime time programs are chosen by the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences (ATAS), a group made up of members of the television industry who have paid to join the Academy’s ranks. Members are placed into peer groups based on their area of expertise, such as acting, writing, directing, make-up, camera work, etc.

These members vote on TV series that submit in specific categories of their choosing. There are rules for how shows are categorized, but they are somewhat easy to subvert— for example, “American Horror Story“ always submits as a miniseries, even though most people would categorize it as a series (giving it a much higher chance of gathering nominations, due to less stiff competition).

Shows also have to choose between submitting in drama or comedy categories, with dramedies getting their pick of the two (for example, “Shameless“ submits as a comedy, even though many would classify it as more of a drama). Shows are asked to submit a certain number of episodes, that they get to choose, which can also affect their success.

One of the Emmys’ main issues is that, with so many tapes to review, voters often pass over smaller, less recognizable names in favor of those that they already recognize. This can be seen among shows, actors and even networks.

Photo by tallone6ft5us on Flickr.com

Often, good shows from networks that aren’t considered very high brow (mainly The CW) don’t even bother submitting for nominations, even when they may be worthy of some of the awards, because they know that the Academy would probably not even consider submissions from unknown networks.

This was changed slightly this year, with Netflix receiving multiple nominations for “Orange is the New Black,” as well as a surprise nomination for Ricky Gervais in “Derek” and IFC receiving nominations for Fred Armisen in “Portlandia” and Kristen Wiig in “The Spoils of Babylon.”

However, the races still primarily belong to cable networks like HBO (who led the pack with 99 nominations) and FX (in fourth with 45 nominations) and the leading broadcast networks, with CBS in second with 47 nominations, NBC in third with 46, and ABC in fifth with 37.

The Emmys also often choose actors and actress based on name alone, a fact that has led to many mis-nominations over the years, including Jeff Daniels for “The Newsroom,” both this year and last, as well as this year’s Matt LeBlanc and Ricky Gervais nominations.

These big names are easy to recognize, and they are attractive to voters who may not have had the time to view all of the episodes they were sent. Even though Daniels, LeBlanc and Gervais were all good in their respective shows, there were more deserving candidates who were passed over.

Photo by Christina on Flickr.com

Another issue that is affected by the voters’ age is the passing over of specific genres, particularly science fiction. The science fiction genre has always been a tough one for the Emmy voters, with shows repeatedly being ignored in the bigger categories, and being relegated to special effects and make-up instead.

This was a big issue this year, particularly with the leading lady from “Orphan Black,” Tatiana Maslany. Maslany’s role should be Emmy bait, with her playing numerous different characters on the show brilliantly, giving each their own mannerisms that truly sell that the clones are separate people. Maslany’s work has been consistently good, and after she was nominated for a Golden Globe this year, many had hope for her to do well this year in the Emmys. However, she was passed over, as many have been before.

Photo via http://img.filmsactu.net

Another issue is repeat nominees. Often, once a nominee breaks into an Emmy category, they’re there to stay, regardless of how their work on that actual season of the show was. This is a similar issue to the voters choosing familiar names— many voters feel that if they were there before, they automatically deserve to stay.

However, for some nominees, including many of this year’s “Modern Family” and “Downton Abbey” noms, this isn’t the case. Essentially automatically granting admittance to past nominees takes away space from newcomers who may deserve it more.

This year’s Emmy nominations weren’t all bad, but they weren’t all good either. The fact of the matter is that the way that Emmy nominations are chosen is outdated, and doesn’t give all of the deserving candidates a chance to get in on the awards show action.

The future of television is changing, and the Emmys are going to have to figure out how to change with it, or they’re going to start to lose their relevance pretty quickly.

Follow Uloop

Apply to Write for Uloop News

Join the Uloop News Team

Discuss This Article

Get Top Stories Delivered Weekly

Back to Top

Log In

Contact Us

Upload An Image

Please select an image to upload
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format
OR
Provide URL where image can be downloaded
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format

By clicking this button,
you agree to the terms of use

By clicking "Create Alert" I agree to the Uloop Terms of Use.

Image not available.

Add a Photo

Please select a photo to upload
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format