Emmy's

[mysteryowl]

Okay, I have seen just a few of the awards tonight and I don't know any of the programs they are talking about. This is a different era with Hulu, Netflix, and other programming for purchase in order to view.

I do think all the additional viewing stations opens up more opportunities for people in the business to make shows. Jobs.

[customerserviceguy]

1. But the additional outlets

also divide up the audience. Less eyeballs means less advertising revenue for a particular show.

[mysteryowl]

6. Right, so the people making the shows don't make top hollywood pay, true.

[UTUSN]

2. Thanks for the thread - I *love* awards shows without hardly ever seen the nominees!1

Julia Lou-Drey was hilarious as usual - as a presenter!1

[mysteryowl]

5. Really? You *love* awards shows,

especially when you don't know who they are?

[UTUSN]

7. Uh, yes, should I depart? I answer what I perceive to be sincere questions, so this:

I've been hooked on awards shows since the early '70s, and off an on over the decades I've seen many of the nominees, but to me awards shows are a genre unto themselves, where the otherwise always scripted maniken actors are (supposedly, haha) being "real". Does this make me explicable?

Iirc, you yourself said you haven't seen all of tonight's nominees and (something like: ) don't know what they're talking about (am not going back to check). So... depending on whatever happens next, I will decide about moving on!1

[mysteryowl]

9. Okay. Great.

[UTUSN]

3. John OLIVER's show beat Stephen - boo!1

[mysteryowl]

4. I think that happened last year too. Right?

[Rhiannon12866]

8. For the last few years, IIRC

[TexasBushwhacker]

10. The good news is that once a series comes out on DVD

you can usually get them at the library. That's how I watched 6 Feet Under.