The View From A Emmy Voter

[JackPeyton]

I've been reading everyone's comments on this message board - and other's. I understand how everyone is surprised, and disappointed, by some of this year's nominees. I was as well.

But as a member of the Academy for almost two decades, I've yet to figure out how to make the system work. I'm proud to work in daytime and always want the best of the best to be nominated -- but how does that happen?

First, you should know, I'm a writer. I can only vote in Best Writing and Best Show. And I have done that again and again over the years.

First, I showed up in person when that was the system. Many people didn't because it could sometimes require a full day of consecutive Saturday and Sunday screenings. (And when you are working full time, that's not always so appealing.)

Then it got switched to voting at home, where you just had to cast one vote for each show. You could cast 1 or 4 votes, and many people assumed everyone voted for their own show and no one else.

Rightly, the shows with smaller staffs complained that was unfair. So now people are sent DVDs, but you cannot judge your own show. If you have a conflict of interest, you cannot vote for the show. (This is writing, don't know how acting is handled.)

It used to be just give each show a score. Now, to try and make things better, there are three different categories you are assigning a point total to. I think that was added because of complaints about "stunt" submissions. The thought being, yes, you could submit a great stunt, but how well did you pull it off?

Not perfect, but I admired the Academy for trying to address problems.

That said, there will always be bias and prejudice -- and if not that, just subjective choices. Everybody doesn't like the same thing.

So here are some of the things that affected my voting, for writing:

-- Do you just go on submitted episodes, or the whole year?

------- Me? I follow the soaps. I watch all the episodes, but yes, the year does affect how I view the episodes. For example, Y&R and DOOL both submitted very good episodes (Nicholas dying in the plane crash; John's death)... that as a viewer, I knew turned out to be not true. Both Nicholas and John turned up alive. And it bothered me. I felt cheated. It felt like a stunt. Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't. But it did affect the way I scored them.

-- OLTL - Asa dying. I have watched this show on and off for over 25 years. I know these characters. I know their stories. I thought this was the EPITOME of great soap opera storytelling. People who I'd watched for 25 years were dealing with a death. It was fantastic.

----- Except that my partner watched it with me, and because he'd never seen OLTL and because nothing was explained, he was completely bored. He didn't know anyone, didn't get any of the connections, and was lost. That affected my votes.

-- GH. Two of the "24" style episodes of the Metro Court hostage crisis. I put these episodes in and my partner was riveted. It was fast, snappy, and had lots of twists.

------- Me? Not so much. I have been a GH fan for a long time. I'm familiar with all the characters. I couldn't get past the fact their first submission had a roomful of long-term characters, but only let Sonny and Carly (and later Maxie) speak. Seriously? YOu've got Robin, Emily, Elizabeth, Nicholas and Alan, among others in a hostage crisis and they are treated as extras? That made me not like the show, though my partner liking all the plot, plot, plot - which helped the overall score I gave them.

B&B -- I'm not a big watcher of this show, but I watch it enough to know who is who. Last year, even though the "Stephanie is abused" shows felt rushed - they were too good to not give high marks to.

This year? I was really disappointed. I'd heard so much about the 5,000th episode with original cast members Eric, Stephanie, Brooke and Ridge, but when I saw it...? I didn't recognize it. It was filled with overly clever banter that felt like I was watching some Noel Coward play. It didn't feel like B&B at all. The characters didn't ring true and it was a big turn-off. But again, I don't know the show as well as OLTL, and maybe if I did, I would have found this great.

Then the rape episode came on that I'd also heard raves about. I'm not a big fan of rape stories in soaps, so I was skeptical. And I didn't like it. It was uncomfortable to watch, but at the end, Brooke (to me) didn't seem traumatized, just upset to realize that someone played a trump card against her.

If you don't agree with me, try and watch Eden's rape on Santa Barbara. I think of that, and still get sick to my stomach. It was so real, and affected the character for so long... where on B&B... Brooke was the same heroine who it didn't seem to have any affect on days later.

But this is all my point. This is just my POV. I loved OLTL because I knew the people. Perhaps, I didn't like B&B because I was less familiar. And the knowledge that DOOL and Y&R's big plot points didn't really happen seeped into my brain.

I did watch all the tapes. And I did vote for what I believed to be the best. But...

I ask all of you. Sincerely. How do we fix this?

this was emailed to me froma friend. it came from here-

http://goldderbyforums.latimes.com/eve/for...864/m/753102271

[rhythmchyc]

Wow.

I highly doubt the other voters are as thoughtful when voting, unfortunately. The other voters probably aren't fans of as many of the shows as this writer is.

I just wish I knew what tape Tammin and Heather submitted that pushed them over Underwood and even Alderson. I mean, come on!

[rhinohide]

Thanks for sharing Jack. That was very informative and interesting.

Some quick thoughts from a poster who openly admits I don't really know enough about the process, or understand it, for my humble opinion to carry much weight, but here goes anyway:

1) I don't understand how one soap can win the best writing, and best direction categories, and NOT be named best drama. There's just some sort of cognitive disconnect there that I can't grasp. Do they submit different scenes for each of the writing and directing and best drama categories? What defines best drama if it's not the writing and the directing? What other factors are taken into consideration?

2) As with any voting process, there are always subjective elements that simply can't be quantified or factored out. That said, the categories for Lead vs. Supporting performers are so poorly defined IMO, that they're virtually meaningless and encourage emotional choices based on popularity. I am certainly not disputing that Jeanne Cooper is a fabulous talent, but is she really a lead actress? I only watch Y&R on a limited basis, but I can't think of any story that Katherine Chancellor drove last year. What are the criteria to be considered lead? I've heard people say Erika Slezak or Robin Strasser should never be considered supporting, but the fact is, the older actresses do not get the material or the screentime (at least not on ABC soaps) to be considered lead IMHO. Ageism sucks and there's no other reason to explain why these incredibly talented women are not better utilized. But until they're given "lead" material I think it devalues the category when they're nominated in that category. One of the things I am loving about OLTL at the moment is they are breaking that mold of featuring the 30 somethings to the exclusion of the extremely talented veteran cast. I think Robin Strasser especially would qualify as lead for next years Emmy Awards. Kim Zimmer is another example of an older actress who gets material that I think qualifies her as a lead, as is Susan Flannery. I don't think Andrea Evans should qualify as lead,

I said quick thoughts. I lied.

ETA: If the Emmy Awards are intended to be a true competition and winners are intended to truly represent the "BEST" in each category then the rules/critera need to be clear and defined and properly weighted so the results are at the very least VALID. What I am reading from most people is they have general impression is that the Emmy Awards are not a genuine competition to determine the best, but the awards are gratuitous and have very little meaning. A goofy analogy would be if some nameless "academy" determined that Big Brown was the best horse last year, deserved to win the Triple Crown, so they just awarded him the Triple Crown, disregarding that he didn't win the Belmont Stakes.

[JackPeyton]

^well, i do believe they submit diff things for best writing, directing, and show. if not the way that can happen is this -i will use this years foe xample with oltlt/gh - oltlt put in prom the musical for best show. it went up against GH's metro court hostage situation. there is now ay in hell prom the musical was better than the hostage situation.

as for lead vs supporting. its a big clusterfu*k. it isnt well organized at all. you have people who were barly on last year putting themselves in lead just because they are the 'face' of the show and people who are lead in every single way (like alicia minshew from amc) in supporting. there really is no clear rules on where to submit yourself.

using OLTL - so far this year i would say lead should be KDP, ES, and RS - AE sure as hell belongs in supporting along with Bree & melissa. However a few years ago (last year) when Jess became Tess Bree should had been in lead actress, because she was very much a lead. I will have to check but i think she was in lead for the prenom - and thats the way it should be.

then again going back to GH - the three leads last year were Becky, kelly, and Laura. Kelly wasnt on any prenom, Becky was in supporting. Laura was next to Megan Ward (who was on a lot from the time she joined the show but didnt really drive any story) & Nancy (who did.... what?)

None of it really is the way it should be and thats what needs to be reformed with the emmy process.

i dont mind a show winning best writing and directing winning best show because there is more to a show than that - the acting, the overall feel, the flow, etc... esp if they submit diff episodes for all three.

[TC]

To drag out that old cliché, it's about the show being more than just the sum of its parts, I guess.

I'd really like to see the breakdown of votes for best show. Just a dream, I know.

[Y&RWorldTurner]

Writers for Best Writing, directors vote for Best Directing, and all of the industry votes for Best Show. So, that's mainly how it's possible for the results to vary in the different categories.