Apocalyptic ruminations about the Emmys

The real job intrudes today. In the meantime, here's a little Emmy story that'll appear in print tomorrow:

If the evocative advertising-world drama "Mad Men" wins the Emmy for Outstanding Drama Series on Sunday, as many expect it to, it could signal a sea change in television's tremulous new world order. It will serve as a tacit admission that not only are viewers slowly but surely migrating from the broadcast networks to cable, but the quality programming is, as well.

And for that reason alone, it may not happen. The Academy of Television Arts and Sciences is hopelessly old-school, largely considering broadcast TV to be, if not the only game in town, then at least the only one worth aspiring to. The pay's better, potential payoffs are off-the-chart and the challenges are greater at the Big Four.

(Archaeologists recently unearthed this early, rejected, design for the Emmy trophy.)

It's tougher to create something good intended for a mass audience for network executives who love to interfere with the creative process than it is for a niche programmer whose tolerance for artistic freedom can result in works of recherché, if precious, brilliance. So that trade-off (or sell-out), to voters' minds, deserves accolades.

Consider: HBO's "The Sopranos" didn't win the Outstanding Drama Series Emmy until its fifth season, and won only twice in its seven seasons. It took a long time to for ATAS to acknowledge that HBO truly belonged on the same landscape as the broadcast networks when it came to the major awards.

A basic cable series, on the other hand, had never even nominated before in either the drama or comedy series category before this season, and this year, there were two. In addition to AMC's "Mad Men," FX's legal thriller "Damages" was nominated for Outstanding Drama Series. They're joined by Showtime's tension-filled serial-killer saga "Dexter," Fox's snarky medical mystery "House," ABC's mythology-laden cult hit "Lost" and ABC's venerable dramedy "Boston Legal."

In "Mad Men's" favor is the fact that it was returning for its second season to even more acclaim as Emmy ballots were reaching voters' hands, something none of the other shows can boast. (In "Damages"' case, it's been off the air for over a year, which really, well, damages its chances for a win.)

(Some historians consider this the first "For Your Consideration" ad. They're just not sure what show it was for.)

Working against "Mad Men" is a not-so-well-kept secret of the Emmys (and the Oscars, for that matter): They don't really reward the best entertainment, but the best of mainstream entertainment. Audiences for "Mad Men" (and, for that matter, "Dexter" and "Damages") is a fraction of that of "House" or "Lost."

But that perception has been changing, slightly, thanks in large part to TV comedy's flagging fortunes. "Arrested Development" won the 2003/04 Outstanding Comedy Series Emmy after struggling through its first season, but its audience never grew and it was eventually cancelled.

"30 Rock" won the trophy last year - and is pretty much expected to again on Sunday - but saw virtually no uptick in viewership this past season. Given the vast potential audience for American television, these shows' audiences aren't appreciably larger than those for "Mad Men."

TV audiences have grown so fractured that the notion of "mainstream" entertainment has been greatly diminished. If "Mad Men" does indeed win on Sunday, it will be proof that the Academy has accepted this fact. If not, it'll simply mean they're still stuck in what Dr. Elisabeth Kubler-Ross called the "denial" stage in accepting the inevitable.

(Scholars are trying to discern whether this Hurricane Ike photo is a metaphor for the broadcast networks.)