Loading ...
As of right now, 20 of the 25 entries on Google’s Hot Trends list—which tracks the “fastest-rising search queries in the U.S.”—are about music. And all of them seem to be Grammy-related: “blink 182 back together,” “m.i.a. pregnant,” “static major,” “raising sand,” and so on. Look back at, say, Sept. 8, the day after the VMAs, and there are only four music-related search terms, surrounded by the usual mix of politics, sports, and TV stories. Does that mean, then, that the Grammys’ seemingly ridiculous strategy of only televising ten awards and filling the rest of the telecast’s three and a half hours with live music actually made people interested in music?
This strategy seemed to draw more attention to the winners whose award presentations were televised—there are a decent number of search queries for Robert Plant and Alison Krauss’ Raising Sand above—while the emphasis on performers, especially younger ones, seemed to make people more interested in current talent than they might have been otherwise. You see interest in M.I.A., Static Major, Adele, Blink-182, Sugarland, and, uh, Chris Brown. Compare that to last year’s post-Grammy hotlist, which doesn’t seem to have anyone under 50 and even includes searches for “how old is tina turner” and “how old is cher.” If no one actually cares about the Grammys as awards, maybe people do still care about seeing people perform new music.
Google Trends: February 9, 2009 [Google]
Nothing about Zooey Deschanel or She & Him. Sigh.
Oof. Biggest national shout-out Charlie Haden’s ever gotten in his life, and Googlers have no idea how to spell his last name.
@natepatrin: googlers are a bit spell-challenged in general.
Last night was the first time in a long time that I was actually interested in watching the Grammys (as opposed to, “ugh, I guess as a fan/journalist/employee I guess I gotta do this”). So. . .I guess, good on them? Although I still just Tivoed through to the performances. Bleep bloop, Portnow.
Last night was the first time in a long time that I was actually interested in watching the Grammys (as opposed to, “ugh, I guess as a fan/journalist/employee I guess I gotta do this”). So. . .I guess, good on them? Although I still just Tivoed through to the performances. Bleep bloop, Portnow.
One last-minute dead guy they forgot: LeRoi Moore of Dave Matthews Band. I’m not a huge fan of their music presently, but they’re a huge presence around here in central VA and as one of those rare bands that can still sell units and fill arenas/sheds, you would’ve thought they’d give the guy his due since he’s been in the band since the beginning.
People were searching for “sweet caroline”? SRSLY???
hilarious recap of the grammys here: http://www.thedumbingofamerica.wordpress.com
They do a pretty good job of ripping Coldplay a new one…
I’m not giving this year’s Grammys an A+ by any means, but I admit that they managed to hold my interest at some points. As per usual, I hurled insults at the TV throughout the broadcast but I quite enjoyed some of the performances. I also like British music and the award show leaned heavily in that direction this year. Dare I say, the best Grammys show in recent memory?!
Maura, did you check your sitemeter to see if you got a bump in traffic during and after the Grammys? My blog did (115 people in seven hours. Most of them were for “Grammy 2009 Torrent” (I don’t host torrents on my blog, but the fact that I advertise that I don’t gives me traffic from people looking for them because the word “torrent” appears on my blog) and “who won album of the year” and “blink 182 plane crash” – yes, still).
@DocStrange:
[www.sitemeter.com]
[www.sitemeter.com]
:)