Golden Globes Podcast Award Mess Mounts as Top Stars Mull Skipping Race
Insiders are skeptical of a $75K sales pitch from sister company ‘Variety’ for editorial coverage (receipts inside) and a murky eligibility process
I cover the creator economy at Like & Subscribe, a standalone newsletter that’s being sampled for a limited time for paid subscribers to The Ankler. I wrote about how Dancing With the Stars has seduced Gen Z with social media, the creators launching FAST channels and the Gen Alpha stars shaking up podcasting. Email me natalie@theankler.com
Not long after the Golden Globes released the list of 25 podcasts eligible for its first-ever best podcast award, the unsolicited emails started to hit inboxes. Do you want to participate in The Hollywood Reporter’s podcast roundtable? Or pay as much as $75,000 for a Creative Impact Award, editorial coverage and a big onstage moment at Variety’s Podcasting FYC Fest?
The Globes has hailed the new award, which will be handed out during its Jan. 11 ceremony on CBS, as breaking ground by including voices that Hollywood often marginalizes. It’s a strategic move for the show: Entice Alex Cooper, Theo Von or Ashley Flowers to show up at the Beverly Hilton, and their legion of young, ultra-online fans might tune in too. But some of those voices are skeptical about their invitation onto one of entertainment’s biggest stages.
When I emailed Shots Podcast Network CEO John Shahidi — who has worked with Von’s podcast and has been reported as his manager in reputable outlets — about This Weekend making the shortlist, he responded, “I am honored Theo is mentioned by the Golden Globes but I have no interest in engaging with them or commenting.” Several hours after this story was published, I heard from Von’s publicist, who said his client is still educating himself about the Globes and its process, adding, “Theo Von does not have a manager, and the person quoted is not authorized to speak on Theo’s behalf nor is involved with anything related to Theo’s submission.”
I also hear multiple podcasters are still weighing whether to bother with the $500 fee to submit themselves for Globes consideration before the Oct. 31 deadline. And then there’s still the question of whether they’ll play the FYC game — and pay the mounting costs associated with campaigning to the 300 international journalists who vote for the Globes.
Penske Media Corp. — the company that owns Variety, THR and most of the trade publications covering the entertainment industry and also owns the Globes, creating a pretty significant conflict of interest for PMC journalists covering the awards — has moved quickly to convert the new category into a revenue generator for its other businesses. As Status’ Oliver Darcy first reported Tuesday, Variety has been trying to entice eligible podcasts to pay steep rates to market to Globes voters.
According to the sales deck slides I reviewed, which you can see below, an eligible podcast can pay $25,000 to become a Podcasting FYC Fest supporting partner, which gets the pod a spot on a Variety-moderated panel, the full kit-and-caboodle of Variety coverage and social posts and a full-page color ad in the Variety FYC Fest Preview out Nov. 11. A $35,000 tier adds the opportunity for a “custom 15-minute Variety-moderated conversation.” And for $75,000, the podcaster will be awarded the Variety Creative Impact Award in Podcasting, which comes with a feature in the magazine and online as well as an onstage award handoff during FYC Fest. (The Ankler hosts FYC events for paid consideration, with coverage of such events labeled as sponsored or partnered content.)
The Variety playbook here echoes what my colleague Richard Rushfield (The Ankler himself) reported last year when the publication tried to sell a new program around the Globes, “throwing an intimate little dinner for (one has to imagine six figures) for your candidate, to which you can invite 30 to 40 guests . . . who happen to be Globes voters (whoever those people may be, because the new for-profit entity has yet to disclose a list).” The program was ultimately kiboshed.
All this comes on top of questions around how and why the eligible podcasts were selected, as PMC also owns Luminate, the data analytics company that was tapped to determine the list, which is meant to represent the “top 25 podcasts” of the year.
I can exclusively report based on conversations with multiple sources that this was in fact the second top 25 list Luminate put together — after the first list inadvertently omitted several wildly popular podcasts. (Keep reading to find out who didn’t make the cut the first time around.)
Representatives for PMC and the Globes did not respond to my requests for comment. (Like several of my Ankler Media colleagues, I was previously employed by PMC — in my case, as senior digital media editor at The Hollywood Reporter.)
Over the last several weeks I called up several podcast insiders to take their temperature on how the Globes has handled its foray into audio. “You have a big awards show recognizing this medium, and that’s great,” one source tells me, and many others agree. But the Globes’ podcast growing pains have dampened the initial excitement about the recognition.
Keep reading to learn:
Which eligible podcasters are getting in the ring
Why some podcast stars may not submit for nominations, and one rep’s no-holds-barred view on the Hollywood awards song-and-dance
Why industry insiders are skeptical of Luminate’s numbers, and the data source they’d really trust to make a top 25 list
The extensive yet opaque criteria the Globes announced for its top 25
The top pods missing from Luminate’s initial list and what drove the redo
Who’s still not eligible: zeitgeisty shows, award winners and beloved gems