Grammys 2016: Taylor Swift, Mark Ronson, and who else won the night's big prizes

Singer Taylor Swift took home the album of the year prize for her work '1989,' while Mark Ronson and Bruno Mars took the record of the year award for 'Uptown Funk' and Ed Sheeran's 'Thinking Out Loud' won the song of the year prize.

|
Lucy Nicholson/Reuters
Meghan Trainor poses with the award for Best New Artist during the 2016 Grammy Awards.

This year’s Grammy Awards included Taylor Swift winning the prestigious album of the year prize for her work “1989,” while Mark Ronson and Bruno Mars were awarded the record of the year prize for their hit “Uptown Funk.” 

In addition, Ed Sheeran picked up the song of the year award for his song “Thinking Out Loud.” 

Other winners include Meghan Trainor, who won the best new artist award; Kendrick Lamar for best rap album for his work “To Pimp a Butterfly”; Ms. Swift for the best pop vocal album award for "1989"; Chris Stapleton for the best country album prize for his album “Traveller”; the group Muse for the best rock album award for their work “Drones”; D’Angelo and the Vanguard for best R&B album for the album “Black Messiah”; and the musical “Hamilton” for the best musical theater album award. 

The cast of the latter performed as part of the telecast, an unusual move for the Grammy Awards but one that reflects how much “Hamilton” is dominating pop culture. 

The time lag of the Grammys – and of most awards shows – can mean that the winners of some of these prizes can seem odd to observers. For example, despite winning the best new artist prize, Ms. Trainor has been on the scene for some time now, with her single “All About That Bass” having debuted during the summer of 2014. 

But Trainor’s album “Title” came out in January 2015, which may partially explain it. The Grammys eligibility date went from October 2014 to September 2015 for albums. 

However, as one might assume, the best new artist award winner (or nominees) can be a harbinger of who wins the big prizes at the Grammy Awards years later. In 2008, Swift, now a Grammys mainstay, was nominated for the prize, while popular band Mumford & Sons was nominated for the award in 2011 and Mr. Sheeran and Mr. Lamar were nominated for the prize as recently as 2014.

Just being nominated for the award and performing a song on the Grammys telecast can be a boon. According to Billboard, singer Brandy Clark had the biggest percentage gain in terms of downloads for the tracks that were sung during the Grammys for her song “Hold My Hand” after she performing the song during the 2015 Grammys ceremony. Her number of downloads had previously been “a negligible figure,” writes Billboard reporter Keith Caulfield. 

Winning or being nominated for the best new artist award doesn’t always guarantee music industry success, of course. “Will the winner go on to dominance – or become the answer to a future trivia question about one-hit wonders?” CNN writer Todd Leopold asked of this year’s best new artist winner. 

Meanwhile, NPR writer Marc Hirsh points out that the new artist prize is strange in that some artists have won it after releasing multiple albums. Mr. Hirsh advocates getting rid of it altogether. “Best New Artist is an odd duck,” he writes. “It's predictive at best… and patronizing at worst… Best New Artist is awarded not for the work of the past year but for the work the performer will be doing in years to come. It professes to honor an artist now for what they will do in the future. At the same time, Best New Artist carries with it the less-generous whiff of being a Grammy with training wheels." 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Grammys 2016: Taylor Swift, Mark Ronson, and who else won the night's big prizes
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/Culture-Cafe/2016/0216/Grammys-2016-Taylor-Swift-Mark-Ronson-and-who-else-won-the-night-s-big-prizes
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe