In theory it is deeply silly to award competitive awards for artistic achievement. If the actors, directors, writers, musicians, etc., were all nominated for the same character, making the same movie, or writing/singing the same song, these awards can make a little more sense. Obviously, no one wants to live in a world where everyone is taking a crack in the same work of art (though the jury is, unfortunately, is still about whether they care if the art is created by human beings), so we have organizations that set trophies based on gender (which are wild) and trophy.

However, awards shows can be vital exhibitions for the entertainment industry and, occasionally, profitable springboard for artists working outside the mainstream. Bong Oonun Hoe is now movie titan Because of his success at the 92nd Academy Award (where he won the Oscars for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay and Best International Parasite Film Film), while it is difficult to imagine Career at Steven Sondheim's Music Theater Progressing for decades without winning seven awards (several of which were critically valued shows that fell flat for mainstream theater). I understand why these rewards exist, and sometimes, I'm glad they are around.

But let's be realistic: most awards bodies consist of artists who see, at most, 30% of the works of valuable prizes. It is especially difficult nowadays if you are an Emmy voter. There is simply too much television there, which means many voters are missing out on great shows, movies, etc. If I were Emmy's elect, I don't know how I could continue with goodwill (and I don't consider Patty through selected episodes sent by networks and followers to be a "good faith" for the quality series).

What is the most effective way forward? I have no idea. However, I know that one of our biggest living actors, who started its start as a series regularly on an outstanding network television show, doesn't have to worry about this issue. Because he just doesn't watch TV.