2009 Grammy nominations...what have we learned?

That any jackass can get a Grammy nomination these days. No, really, any jackass.

Jonas Brothers, best new artist? Honestly?

Neo and Lil' Wayne both in the category for album of the year? Honestly?

"I Kissed A Girl" for best pop female vocal? Honestly?

"4 FUCKING MINUTES TO SAVE THE FUCKING WORLD" FOR BEST POP COLLABORATION????????? The fact that this song even garnered ANY Grammy nominations is completely unacceptable. Unless there is a category for "worst song by aging hyena that ought to retire". Then yes, go right ahead; in fact, nominate every song off Madonna's Hard Candy album for that category.

This isn't shocking, you know. The fact that at the 2000 Grammys, Britney Spears was a nominee for best new artist and the Backstreet Boys were nominated for album of the year clearly shows where the Academy's heads have been. (Don't get me wrong, I like Britney and all...I just don't think she deserves a Grammy)

The point is, the Grammys are supposedly about honoring the best in artistic integrity, and really it's about sales and popularity. Because Lil' Wayne, who has recieved the most nominees of any performer this year, is the first person I think of when I think of an innovative artiste.

There are some moments where the Grammys do get it right. For instance, nearly every song in the Best Dance Recording category lands on some level of "amazing" in my book. Examples:
Hot Chip "Ready For the Floor"
Daft Punk "Harder Better Faster Stronger" (about seven years late, but that's forgiveable)
Sam Sparro "Black And Gold"
These tracks represent innovation and creativity within contemporary music, as opposed to just being lazy and rehashing trends. Other nominees that I feel are rightfully honored are Kings of Leon, Gnarls Barkley, Beck, Radiohead, Death Cab For Cutie, Robyn, The Raconteurs. Bands and artists that are forward-thinking and actually possess talent. Which is what the Grammys SHOULD be about, but that's just beating an old dog to death, now isn't it?