By Alec Nunez

The Grammy Awards are always a topic of discussion each year, never failing to stir up the pot of controversy. Whether it be questionable speeches or outlandish outfits, the award show always manages to find its way into headlines. This year was no exception. As audiences viewing the event from home eagerly awaited to discover who the album of the year awards would go to, many had agreed Kendrick Lamar would surely take the cake with his 2017 chart-topping album Damn which reached sales hailing in the millions in less than three months.

Fans of Kendrick Lamar were disappointed to see Bruno Mars walk across the stage upon the announcement of his winning album of the year, quick to note Mars possessed sale numbers nowhere near Lamar’s. This seemingly arbitrary giving of an award raised discussions as to the validity of Grammy nominations, with many believing it is a skewed system. However, it goes deeper than figures behind a curtain pulling the strings of the awards.

The Grammys never work in favor of an undisputedly “best” album—the system simply isn’t tailored to be apparent. This is why Mars beat out Lamar. While Lamar’s album was surely the best in terms of reception and sales, Mars ultimately took the award, as his album had cross-generational appeal. These awards favor a majority population. Mars’ album was able to appeal to a larger demographic, whereas Lamar’s clicked with the minority group. This makes the decision to allow Mars to win significantly clearer; it is more reasonable to assume someone’s grandparents would favor Mars’ feel-good album over Lamar’s aggressively passionate approach to his album.

Numbers don’t always represent the lion’s share, nor are they always a sign of success. If the majority of a populous favors one side more than the other, the opposition is guaranteed to suffer. And that, as they say, is that.