So it’s come down to this…
The Television Academy begins the two-week voting process on Monday, extending it until Friday, August 28 at 10pm PST. Emmy voters have had access to an online viewing site since the beginning of August, allowing them to uniquely stream series and actor tape submissions without stacks and stacks of DVDs to plow through. The two-week voting window may seem narrow, but remember that the voting process is uniquely online, something the Emmys have done before without significant issue or noise. Very different from the noisier Oscar voters who apparently don’t know how to log into their email accounts.
The biggest and potentially most impactful change this year is the broadening of the Emmy voter pool. In previous years, a “blue ribbon panel” of Emmy voters was selected, and the smaller groups would determine the winners. These voters were a microcosm of the larger Television Academy body, so the Emmy winners were often more unpredictable and potentially eschewed the broader tastes of the Academy community at large. This year, anyone in a specific peer group (actors, etc) can vote as long as they demonstrate no noticeable conflict of interest and they have watched all submissions within the category in which they’re attempting to vote.
The ramifications of this change could be huge. More likely now than ever before, the winners could be more buzzed, more popular shows than in past years when the final voting pool was approximately 200 members. Now, thousands of Television Academy members have the right to vote as long as they meet the pre-defined criteria. So, what does that really mean in terms of winners? Well, you’re less likely to see a left-field Julianna Margulies Lead Actress win as in last year’s ceremony (doubly so this year since she’s not even nominated) and more likely to see a buzzier candidate win. Does this mean Taraji P. Henson has it in the bag thanks to her broad character appeal and her seemingly everywhere persona? Or does it open up Viola Davis’s perceived lead thanks to a win in the similar voting structure of the SAG Awards? Does it make it easier for Jon Hamm to win based on his personal likability and “it’s time” awards narrative? Does William H. Macy win for his likability as well?
In terms of series winners, the focus should be on series with broader appeal as well. Much like the Oscars, the Emmys dangers on becoming even more of a popularity contest now that the voter pool is open to the entire Television Academy membership. As much as people would like to disagree, I personally think the case for Modern Family to repeat becomes even stronger with the change in voting strategy. The past Emmy winner is the only show in the Comedy Series nominees with broad appeal. As I’ve said before, it’s the only series you can show anyone without alienating a viewer. Plus, every single other nominee in the category can be considered a “niche” show: too political, too indy, too silly, etc. Modern Family, the most watched series of the group, doesn’t offend, and, given its large cast, it has something to which nearly everyone can related. Plus, it’s the most openly emotional series of the bunch. I know the Internet doesn’t want to hear it, but, frankly, I don’t think the Emmys really care.
Drama Series is trickier, and I’m not exactly sure how the broader voting window really affects the winner here honestly. All the signs point to Game of Thrones as your winner: most nominations (including Direction and Writing), most watched, buzziest, etc. Does the broader voting pool effectively eliminate the bias against fantasy series (Lost being the only show with fantasy elements to win the big prize – of course that was in its first season before the central mythology of the show nearly derailed it)? With a reported 20 million viewers an episode (all-in, including HBONow and HBOGo – I’m assuming Emmy voters aren’t pirates), it’s by far the most watched series. Even as a fan of the series, I still can’t shake the feeling that, as great as this season ultimately was, it’s not The Season to reward the show.
It’s hard to gauge the popularity of its competition too. Since Netflix refuses to issue meaningful metrics on their viewership, it’s impossible to gauge just how popular shows like House of Cards and Orange is the New Black really are in comparison. Downton Abbey is most assuredly a highly rated show, but no one really feels that deserves to even be in the running, let alone to win. Homeland Season Four is exciting, and they’ve picked strong representations of the best of the season in their Emmy selection pack. But has it been tainted by Season Three? Will Emmy voters go for it just because it’s a better season? Once you’ve been down the problem path, it’s difficult to return to the winner’s circle. Better Call Saul has its supporters, but it’s Mad Men that comes up most often as a direct competitor to Game of Thrones. Will the Academy want to reward the series yet another Emmy win though? It’s not like last year’s winner Breaking Bad where a quality series that caught the zeitgeist after being nearly ignored in the Drama Series race for so many years. Mad Men has won multiple series trophies already. Does anyone think it deserves another?
Of course, the broadening of the voting pool could not impact the series categories as much as it would the acting categories. Voters have to prove they’ve watched all six online submissions for each show in order to vote in that category. Simple math tells you that voters have to watch 42 drama episodes and 42 comedy episodes in order to vote in that category. That’s a lot of television watching for people working long hours on now-filming fall series or the occasional films.
It’s a lot of television watching for anyone.
