• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Super Bowl or the Oscars: Which has more prestige?

J

johnnya2k6

This Sunday (2/24) is the 85th Annual Academy Awards, which will also mark the 60th anniversary the Oscars have been televised (I'm sure prior to that up until the late '60s, they were on radio).

The Oscars have traditionally become the second biggest television event of the year behind, you guessed, the Super Bowl. But of the two, which has the most prestige? I'm asking this because for the Oscars, the cost for 30 seconds of ad time has jumped from $1.7 million last year to $1.8 million. For Super Bowl XLVII this year, it was $3.8 million, and despite claims to the contrary, the big game actually draws in more female viewers than the Oscars. Apple knows this very well; they used Super Bowl XVIII in 1984 to run their famous Macintosh commercial, and the 2010 Oscars to introduce the iPad.

In terms of viewership, the last four Super Bowls at over 105 million viewers have become the most-watched programs of all time (burying the M*A*S*H finale to #5), while the Oscars generally get 35-40 million viewers.

Another is the unexpected moments. The Oscars had that streaker; the Super Bowl: Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction and the power outage.

Then there's the lengths: The Super Bowl is usually over by 10:00-10:30 pm Eastern, while the Oscars: three hours, even longer!

And finally, both events are watched at home, but when it comes to large gatherings: Super Bowl, primarily sports bars; the Oscars? I remember in 2000 seeing TVs in a university rec center and later a hotel lobby (and of course, a restaurant/bar) being tuned to the awards, which were still on tape delay here in Alaska until 2011.

So to answer my own question: BOTH!!! But what do you think?
 
It depends on whether or not you're a sports fan in general, and an American football fan in particular, or whether you follow Hollywood and all its happenings. One could make the case that both are crass celebrations of excess, and one could make the case that both are celebrations of the best of America, even though in both cases, many of the players are not American.

The statistics you cited would lead one to believe that both are important, but that the Super Bowl is the top dog. Still, I wonder what the numbers are for the World Cup final?

Personally, I have to follow one of the two teams before I'll spend any time watching the Super Bowl - this year, I did not - and I couldn't give a rat's rear end about anything that Hollywood does, so for me, for this year, the answer is: neither.
 
I tip my hat to the Super Bowl. I follow both sports and celebrity culture, but even if I followed neither, the Super Bowl has the commercials and the half time show as spectacles aside from the sport. The Oscars, generally, are more specifically geared towards the movies from that year, including the dance numbers, songs, etc within the telecast.

I say that having not watched a full Oscar telecast in 10+ years, while watching every Super Bowl. I will be tuning in this year to see Seth MacFarlane as host. Personally, I think it was a great idea to get him as host. I think there is a possibility that he will draw in viewers that typically view the Oscars as either too stodgy, too geared towards Hollywood and the less than spectacular box office draws that have been nominated in years past, or people who see the Oscars as too feminine and skewed towards females.
 
This year's SB was the first one I've watched in many years - because my team was in it. Otherwise it is way too boring and stuffy to sit through. The game itself is usually not one of the better ones of the season and the commercials can be seen anytime afterward.

I never watch the Oscars. Don't give a whit watching egotists pat themselves on the back and am not a big movie-goer anyway so the comparisons don't mean much to me.
 
I generally detest most, if not all, award shows, so my answer's easily the Super Bowl. I'll watch the Grammys and the American Music Awards for the performances, and I've never watched an entire Oscars ceremony in my lifetime, and probably never will.

I believe that the Super Bowl just brings everyone together for the most part, from your hardcore football fans, the fans of the participating teams, and the casual fans (especially ones who have money on the game). As to the Oscars, you really have to be a fan of celebrity culture and a die-hard movie buff to sit through three-plus hours of that show.
 
Definitely the Super Bowl. There are far too many award shows as it is, although the Oscars still have prestige, they are about the only award show left that does.

Besides the Super Bowl really is an event. There's a bit for everyone, even non-sports types.

As Homer Simpson says "Oh a Grammy"?
 
I'm generally more interested in who wins Academy Awards than who wins the Super Bowl, but I skip the television program announcing the Oscars. Who needs 3.5 hours to do what the Associated Press will tell me in 400 words the next morning?
 
PTBoardOp94 said:
I'm generally more interested in who wins Academy Awards than who wins the Super Bowl, but I skip the television program announcing the Oscars. Who needs 3.5 hours to do what the Associated Press will tell me in 400 words the next morning?
Click to expand...

Or the Oscars website as soon as the show is over.

Me, I have no interest in watching the self-worship service that is the Oscars. I'll be watching Doctor Who: The Doctors Revisited - The Second Doctor, instead.
 
Back to me: My first Super Bowl was XXIV in 1990, when the halftime shows were still bland ("In Living Color's" opposite "Winter Magic" would change everything in '92) and the Lombardi Trophy presentation was at the winning teams' locker room (they would be moved right to the field in '96, with the accompanying music to follow after Roger Goodell became commissioner). All the pregame stuff went from a good two hours to now a FULL DAY!!!!

As for the Oscars? My first was in 1992 -- when Silence of the Lambs ruled the night though I was rooting for Beauty And The Beast -- but didn't watch them from beginning to end until two years later (when Steven Spielberg finally won; I napped 3/4 into the 1993 show).

Unlike the WWE's Wrestlemania, the drama and excitement of Super Bowl Sunday and Oscar Night is very unscripted...and most of all, they're both on FREE TV!!!! No wonder why they are the real and original Grandest Stages of Them All!
 
I started losing interest in the Oscars in the 80s when it seemed more and more of the nominees were films and actors I had never heard of and had little interest seeing. This year, I have seen a grand total of 1 film nominated for something, and that's only because a friend insisted I see it.
The other issue for me is the politics: The Academy members have used the Oscars for years as an excuse to make all manner of left-wing rants while on stage. I find this indulgent and disgusting.
Super Bowl -- teams and players I have heard of, no politics. Super Bowl wins.
 
I'm another one who has probably never watched an entire Oscars broadcast and will check the web for the big winners. Most times now I really don't care about who wins because most times the movies that win are ones that are the favorites of the critics and the industry, and little or nothing that viewers actually watched or liked. Plus I don't care anything about seeing some celebrity spewing their political views (and in some cases showing their ignorance) that have nothing to do with the award they won. Just accept the award and get off.

I used to like watching the Grammys, but even with them now most of the awards I want to see are in the ones that were presented earlier and only get a quick mention, so I check the web for that as well now.

I watch the Super Bowl every year, even when it's between teams I didn't follow, so they get my vote.
 
the oscars are a hollywood "Love Fest", where the "Best" sometimes do NOT win due to Hollywood Politics and Butt Kissing, the team with the most points wins the superbowl, they keep score, and Left Wing Political "Rants" never happen. side note: i lost interest in the latest "Hollywood" movies years ago and i do Not know the movies they talk about or most of the actors, so i Don't Care about any of those left wing A-Holes. BUT it might be fun to tune in just to see jack nicholson fall asleep drooling all over himself.
 
It's like comparing apples and oranges.

However, I will make one suggestion:

In the future, ABC's Sunday-afternoon programming on Oscar day should end at 5 P.M. ET, so East Coast stations can have local news from 5 to 5:30 ET.

There would then be a "red carpet" show from 5:30 to 7 P.M. ET, followed by the awards ceremony itself.

Between the end of the Oscar show and 11 or 11:30 P.M. ET, there should be backstage interviews with winners.

Considering how late into the night the Oscars go (it used to be worse years ago), the Motion Picture Academy sometimes still thinks that no one lives east of the Rockies!
 
Joseph_Gallant said:
It's like comparing apples and oranges.

However, I will make one suggestion:

In the future, ABC's Sunday-afternoon programming on Oscar day should end at 5 P.M. ET, so East Coast stations can have local news from 5 to 5:30 ET.

There would then be a "red carpet" show from 5:30 to 7 P.M. ET, followed by the awards ceremony itself.

Between the end of the Oscar show and 11 or 11:30 P.M. ET, there should be backstage interviews with winners.

Considering how late into the night the Oscars go (it used to be worse years ago), the Motion Picture Academy sometimes still thinks that no one lives east of the Rockies!
Click to expand...

Of course it's better than it was 30 years ago (and long before that) when the Oscars would start at 10 p.m. Eastern and (if lucky) would be over by 1 a.m.
 
BD Sullivan said:
Of course it's better than it was 30 years ago (and long before that) when the Oscars would start at 10 p.m. Eastern and (if lucky) would be over by 1 a.m.
Click to expand...

In the early years (and as evidenced by old listings), the Oscar telecast started at 10:30 Eastern and would run till midnight followed by either news or sign-off.

Usually they would end on time, but it wasn't the case in 1959; after Gigi won Best Picture, there was 20 minutes left in the show, and Jerry Lewis ad-libbed a song and dance number. NBC cut him off, and they decided to use up the remaining time by running a short film about pistols!

When ABC got the long-term rights in 1976 (NBC had them at first but they would later alternate with ABC in the '60s to early '70s), Perry Como was their lead-in. Barbara Walters would come a few years later before she ended them in 2000, thus expanding their red carpet show to 90 minutes.

And I remember NFL Films' "Road to the Super Bowl" special being in syndication on Super Bowl weekend until about the late '90s.

By the way, somebody put up Super Bowl I on YouTube...only it consists of NFL Films' footage mixed in with the full radio broadcast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2ZU9C68I0g
 
The Super Bowl, and it's not even close.

With all the halftime hulabaloo and hype about the commericals,the SB has something for everyone. There's nothing on the Academy Awards to interest Joe Sixpack in the midwest/south.
 
(burying the M*A*S*H finale to #5),
Click to expand...
I don't understand the reasoning behind the constant bashing of the M*A*S*H finale, but that was 30 years ago this week. I get it, some of you didn't like M*A*S*H. I didn't "get" M*A*S*H, so I never watched it either. But I also don't harp on it, either. But it has stood for 30 years, so apparently they did something right.

As for the question raised here, most shows about the Oscars are more about who wore what on the red carpet, while the Super Bowl seems to be more about the commercials and the halftime show, so I suppose that they cancel each other out, when it comes to the hype. ::)
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom