#1 [url]

Jan 3 09 9:11 AM

My theory is, Mariah is simply too big a name to be worshipped by Grammy voters.

Let's take a look at the top 10 selling artists of soundscan era, and the number of Grammy's they won:

1.Garth Brooks -68,143,000, 2
2.Beatles -57,088,000, gadzillons (well, actually 20-30 something)
3.Mariah Carey -51,569,000, 5
4.Metallica -51,136,000, 7
5.Celine Dion -50,571,000, 5
6.George Strait -40,619,000, ZERO
7.Tim McGraw -37,591,000, 3
8.Alan Jackson -36,520,000, 1
9.Pink Floyd -36,520,000, ZERO (or is it one?)
10.Shania Twain -33,707,000. 5

See? Mariah's 5 really doesn't seem that bad now, does it? I mean it's actually quite possible for her minions to add "the most critically acclaimed (by the Grammy's) among top-selling female artist" title to her marketing catchphrase in a few years.

In reality though, I think Grammy voters do like popular artists, but you gotta be their favorite to win. IMO, Mariah has been borderline fav, generally recognized for her obviously immense talent, but never living up to their "standard" (which I suspect to be somewhat higher than for other artists because of her talent and her barbie doll image). So I do think there is some truth to that "she'll be more loved by Grammy voters if she..." arguments, but seriously, why do we care? I mean she's got five already, and she's not going to win dozens more anyway, so why would she stress herself to get a couple more? It just doesn't make sense. She's got the renown and money already. She doesn't need their seal of approval. Sure, E=MC2 not getting a single nom is disappointing and even shocking, but it would only be the several hundredth time that whatever Grammy did made absolutely no sense...