Well, yet again the Emmys have been canceled. And once again, the people behind the annual pat-ourselves-on-the-back event are scrambling to figure out when to try again.

I’ve got an idea - how’s never?

Not only does the viewing public not need an awards show in the wake of recent disastrous events, but the show stands as yet another meaningless time waster that does nothing but give the entertainment industry another chance to congratulate itself.

I think just about everyone would love to work in a field where not only do you do your job, but then you get to throw a party, on live television, just to talk about how great you did your job. Most of us will never get much thanks for even bothering to show up at our jobs. Why don’t we get an awards show for fast-food employees? Those people thanklessly put up with an awful lot, and everyone acts like they’re morons. I’d like to see anyone deal with people in that atmosphere for more than a few weeks and actually like to put on their rayon uniform every day.

Besides, I think that we all agree that America watches too much television. So why would we need to watch a show about all the crap we spent the last year watching? And why do we need award shows at all, for that matter?

Nine times out of 10, the big winners don’t really deserve the award. Remember the movie “Titanic?” That giant waste of money and more than three hours of precious life won the Academy Award for Best Picture in ’97, while a different movie won for Best Screenplay, and yet another movie won Best Director. How can a movie with a bad script, a director who is agreeably not the best of the year and only a mere Best Supporting Actress award win Best Picture? That movie made mad bank, that’s why.

Did the Beatles ever win a Grammy during its career? No, but Milli Vanilli won one its first year.

Not to mention Celine Dion’s Album of the Year Grammy in ’96, beating out four albums that were actually good. I still get angry when I remember her speech - “Thank you to all the writers, producers, musicians, technicians” - in other words, everyone who made it possible for her to come in, wail into a microphone while reading lyrics off a sheet and be considered great. Big woopty doo.

And the list goes on and on. There are a million stories about subpar material winning big rewards.

It’s to the point that all you have to do to pick the winner of every award on every awards show is to choose the biggest money maker or most popular on the list. The only show that admits this without shame is the Billboard Awards, simply because they go by the biggest moneymaker.

I know that in the wake of all that’s happened we need to go on with our normal lives. But just because the Emmys are a normal waste of three hours for many every year doesn’t mean we should keep it going. Famous people walking down a red carpet in designer clothes, only to pick up an award congratulating them for being famous is a waste of all of our time.

And besides, does who wins really change anything? If “The West Wing” beats out “The Sopranos” in more categories, are you going to stop watching? Or even start watching, for that matter? No, of course you’re not. Just like I didn’t suddenly think “Titanic” was a great movie when it got the award. That would take a brain tumor.

And do you remember what show won any category last year? I sure don’t, and if you do chances are you’ve spent far too much time staring at a screen.

With any luck, plans for the next attempt at the Emmys will falter and fizzle out. And maybe we can make that a new tradition to adhere to every year.

At the very least, producers of these shows could at least put an end to all the awful musical numbers. Is that so much to ask?

Drew Harmon, State News film reporter, can be reached at harmondr@msu.edu