The article reflects on the author’s 26-year journey covering the Oscars, highlighting the rise and fall of Oscar blogging due to corporate monopolies taking over online discourse about awards. The author expresses concern over the rise of a “hive mind” mentality within Hollywood, which they argue suppresses dissenting views and enforces conformity, likening it to a form of fascism.
Citing personal experiences, the author discusses being sidelined after a negative portrayal and emphasizes the dangers of censorship in critical discussions around films and awards. They argue that important dissenting voices are essential for healthy debate and understanding of the Oscar race. The author critiques platforms like Gold Derby and the Awards Expert App for favoring groupthink, stating that such environments stifle creativity and honesty, thus impairing the Oscar prediction process.
Moreover, the piece underscores that films like “One Battle After Another” may project a politically charged agenda rather than universal themes, warning that such a narrow focus could alienate voters. The author advocates for maintaining open discourse to fully grasp both the strengths and weaknesses of films in contention, believing it necessary for accurate predictions and understanding within the awards community. The article concludes with a caution against allowing platforms to become a monoculture, warning that it leads to error and loss of genuine debate.
