Loading...
Start Date
25-6-2022 12:00 AM
End Date
25-6-2022 12:00 AM
Abstract
This paper considers how the George Foster Peabody Awards’ criteria and institutional arrangements have adapted to accommodate queer television programming since the 1990s, and how, concurrently, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) developed as an awarding entity. In a forthcoming article, I argued the Peabody’s and Golden Globes’ different “legitimizing” practices during the 1970s and 1980s helped to define LGBTQ+ programming as “elite,” sequestering it from television’s “everyday” discursive positioning. I interrogated how the outcast status of the Golden Globes, organized by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association (HFPA), compelled greater attention to “queer” television oddities, even while the recognitions upheld a troublingly classed framing of LGBTQ+ shows that dovetailed with the organizer’s late-1980s discrediting following disclosures of bribery and other dealings. The Peabodys, on the other hand, singled out “quality” entries for acclaim, paving the way for more contemporary associations between LGBTQ+ television and premier viewing platforms.
In the paper I propose, I will analyze in greater depth how activist media watchdogs such as GLAAD, in league with gay publications including The Advocate and Out, emulated the Peabodys’ public relations strategies, becoming de facto awarding bodies that adopted “quality” criteria for recognizing queer-themed shows. These organizations’ combined focus on prestige productions ultimately undermined intersectional modes of media address in favor of hollow publicity campaigns, a trade-off that went largely unrecognized in mainstream and gay press. While media outlets continue to deride the HFPA’s institutional politics, they uphold an exclusive ethos by lauding the Peabody’s and GLAAD’s “worthy” selections.
“Accelerating Acceptance”: Interrogating the Peabodys’ and GLAAD’s Post-1990s Queer Inclusivity Awards Initiatives
This paper considers how the George Foster Peabody Awards’ criteria and institutional arrangements have adapted to accommodate queer television programming since the 1990s, and how, concurrently, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) developed as an awarding entity. In a forthcoming article, I argued the Peabody’s and Golden Globes’ different “legitimizing” practices during the 1970s and 1980s helped to define LGBTQ+ programming as “elite,” sequestering it from television’s “everyday” discursive positioning. I interrogated how the outcast status of the Golden Globes, organized by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association (HFPA), compelled greater attention to “queer” television oddities, even while the recognitions upheld a troublingly classed framing of LGBTQ+ shows that dovetailed with the organizer’s late-1980s discrediting following disclosures of bribery and other dealings. The Peabodys, on the other hand, singled out “quality” entries for acclaim, paving the way for more contemporary associations between LGBTQ+ television and premier viewing platforms.
In the paper I propose, I will analyze in greater depth how activist media watchdogs such as GLAAD, in league with gay publications including The Advocate and Out, emulated the Peabodys’ public relations strategies, becoming de facto awarding bodies that adopted “quality” criteria for recognizing queer-themed shows. These organizations’ combined focus on prestige productions ultimately undermined intersectional modes of media address in favor of hollow publicity campaigns, a trade-off that went largely unrecognized in mainstream and gay press. While media outlets continue to deride the HFPA’s institutional politics, they uphold an exclusive ethos by lauding the Peabody’s and GLAAD’s “worthy” selections.
Bio
Benjamin Kruger-Robbins is a visiting assistant professor in the Department of Film and Media at Emory University, and he served previously as a Mellon Humanities Faculty Fellow at the University of California, Irvine. He holds a PhD in visual studies from UC Irvine, and his research focuses on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) involvement within both the American television industry and TV audience cultures. His writing has been published in Flow, Sexualities, and the edited anthology The Politics of “Twin Peaks” (Lexington Books, 2019).