1/ RE: Oscars' ratings.

I tweet this every few months, but that's why it's critical.

It is NO surprise ratings drop each year. Trad TV is collapsing. The problem is that the award shows don't innovate. They don't think about what could be better, or new, or is newly possible

2/ Critics focus on the length of the shows, the selection criteria and the performers. But no one asks "Why *watch* this live, not *follow* it live?". There's literally no reason to do so.

3/ The overall structure is designed for industry, not audiences. After the opening monologue, why would tens of millions watch a person read a card, audiences sit in chairs, winners walk on stage, winners talk for 1 minute?

4/ It's fine to have that focus, but then don't be surprised by the ratings or claim the event's promotional values (for the industry, for the nominees, etc.). It's not an audience event, it's a readout.

5/ Two minutes before every award, for example, the at-home audience should be polled for their votes. It should then be shown when announced.

Year-after-year, across all award shows, there's no experimentation to the mass experience (just small tests on O&O sites).

6/ More broadly, nothing is done to facilitate the cultural conversation. Few nominees are available to rent before the show, watching requires a Pay TV subscription and the Oscars site is basically a museum, not a content discovery platform

7/ Case in point. Imagine if American Idol or The Voice were run like a major award show: People you don't know vote on artists you haven't seen, who you just look at unless one of them wins and thanks people you don't know

8/ There is SO much potential, but unfortunately, it's hard to imagine any of it being realized without a tech platform buying the rights.