The scene was once an unshakable American ritual: a Sunday evening in late winter or early spring, families and friends gathered around the television, drawn by the glamour, the drama, and the shared cultural moment of the Academy Awards. For decades, the Oscars were more than just an awards show; they were a television event, a Super Bowl for the arts. The pinnacle of this cultural dominance was 1998, when a little film called Titanic steered a staggering 55 million viewers to the broadcast.
Contrast that with the 2023 ceremony, which drew a mere 18.7 million viewers. While this represented a welcome uptick from the historic low of 10.4 million in 2021 (the pandemic-era, socially-distanced show), the overall trend is undeniable: a steep, persistent, and seemingly inexorable decline in American viewership.
This is the central dilemma facing the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. The Oscars, once a monolithic symbol of Hollywood’s cultural supremacy, are now fighting for relevance in a fragmented media landscape. The question is no longer if the audience is shrinking, but why—and more importantly, what, if anything, can be done to win them back. This is not merely a problem of television ratings; it is a crisis of cultural connection. To understand the path forward, we must first diagnose the multifaceted illness plaguing this iconic institution.
Part 1: The Anatomy of a Decline – A Perfect Storm of Challenges
The erosion of the Oscars’ audience is not the result of a single misstep but a convergence of seismic shifts in technology, culture, and the film industry itself.
1.1 The Great Fragmentation: The Rise of Streaming and the End of Appointment TV
The most significant factor is the tectonic shift in how we consume media. The era of “appointment television,” where millions of people simultaneously tuned into one of three major networks, is over. The Oscars were a prime beneficiary of that era. Today, the media landscape is a hyper-competitive, on-demand universe dominated by streaming services like Netflix, Disney+, Hulu, and Max.
- Content Overload: Americans are inundated with more high-quality television and film content than ever before. A three-to-four-hour awards ceremony must now compete with entire seasons of prestige TV, a bottomless well of viral YouTube and TikTok content, and thousands of films at one’s fingertips. The opportunity cost of watching the Oscars has never been higher.
- The At-Home Cinema: The very concept of a “movie of the year” has been diluted. When blockbusters and arthouse darlings are viewed on the same 65-inch screen at home, the hierarchy that the Oscars represent feels less immediate. The magic of the “theatrical experience,” which the Oscars celebrate, is no longer a universal shared experience.
- The Paradox of Inclusion: Ironically, the studios that now dominate the Oscars—streaming giants like Netflix and Apple TV+—are the same entities undermining its traditional TV model. They covet the prestige of an Academy Award but have no inherent stake in propping up linear television ratings.
1.2 The Cultural Chasm: Elitism vs. Populism
The Oscars have long wrestled with a perceived disconnect between critical acclaim and popular taste, but this chasm has widened into a canyon.
- The “Oscar Bait” Cliché: A specific genre of film has become synonymous with the awards: historical dramas, biopics, and gritty character studies about profound suffering. While often superbly made, these films can feel formulaic and, to a mass audience, unappealing. The term “Oscar bait” itself is a pejorative, suggesting a calculated effort to win awards rather than to genuinely connect with a broad audience.
- The Blockbuster Blind Spot: For years, the Academy largely ignored commercially dominant genres like science-fiction, superhero films, and high-concept horror. While The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King swept the 2004 Oscars, it was a notable exception. The snubbing of critically acclaimed crowd-pleasers like The Dark Knight (2008) for a Best Picture nomination was a watershed moment that alienated a huge segment of the movie-going public. It reinforced the perception that the Academy was an out-of-touch ivory tower, disdainful of the films that actually paid Hollywood’s bills.
- Niche Nominees: In recent years, many Best Picture nominees are films that, despite their quality, have been seen by a tiny fraction of the American public. When the average moviegoer hasn’t seen, or often even heard of, most of the nominated films, the stakes of the broadcast evaporate. Why watch a competition where you don’t know the players?
1.3 The Political Polarization
In an increasingly divided America, the Oscars have become another front in the culture wars.
- The #OscarsSoWhite controversy in 2015 and 2016 was a necessary and vital corrective, forcing the Academy to confront its systemic lack of diversity and implement meaningful reforms. However, for a segment of the audience, this injected politics into what they saw as an escape.
- Subsequently, acceptance speeches and host monologues that address social and political issues—from climate change to immigration to LGBTQ+ rights—have become routine. While many viewers applaud this use of a global platform, a significant portion of the potential audience feels alienated or preached to, tuning out in search of apolitical entertainment. The ceremony is caught in an impossible bind: criticized for not being progressive enough by some, and for being too political by others.
1.4 The Runtime and Pacing Problem
The Oscars are long. Historically, they often run close to four hours. In an age of truncated attention spans and binge-watching, a bloated, often sluggishly paced broadcast is a hard sell. The perception that time is wasted on poorly conceived comedy bits, lengthy musical numbers for songs most viewers haven’t heard, and the shuffling of presenters on and off stage makes the ceremony feel self-indulgent and inefficient.
Part 2: The Academy’s Prescription – Reforms, Reactions, and Mixed Results
Confronted with this stark reality, the Academy has not been idle. Under CEO Dawn Hudson and then-President David Rubin, it has implemented a series of reforms, often controversial, in an attempt to staunch the bleeding.
2.1 The Popular Film Category Debacle
In 2018, the Academy announced the creation of a new category: “Outstanding Achievement in Popular Film.” The backlash was immediate and fierce. Critics argued it was a transparent and desperate ploy for ratings that would create a second-class tier of winners, ghettoizing the very blockbusters it was trying to attract. The idea was tabled indefinitely, but its proposal revealed the Academy’s deep anxiety and its struggle to reconcile artistic merit with popular appeal.
2.2 The Hostless Experiment and the Search for a Vibe
After the Kevin Hart debacle in 2019 (where he stepped down following controversy over past tweets), the Oscars went hostless for several years. The result was a mixed bag. Some ceremonies, like the 2020 show, felt streamlined and focused. Others felt unmoored, lacking a central comedic voice to guide the evening. The experiment showed that a host isn’t strictly necessary, but a strong, charismatic emcee (like Billy Crystal, Whoopi Goldberg, or more recently, Jimmy Kimmel) can provide a cohesive energy and generate buzz that a hostless show lacks. The return of hosts in recent years indicates a return to this traditional stabilizing force.
2.3 Tinkering with the Format: Pre-recording and Editing
In a highly controversial move for the 2022 ceremony, the Academy decided to pre-record the awards for eight categories (including Film Editing, Sound, and Original Score) and edit them into the main live broadcast. The goal was to shorten the runtime and maintain viewership momentum.
The move was met with outrage from industry professionals, who argued it was a profound disrespect to these crafts, implicitly labeling them as “less than.” While the Academy has since walked back this decision for some categories, the incident highlighted the impossible tension between honoring all branches of filmmaking and producing a snappy television show.
2.4 Embracing (and Then Rejecting) the Slap
The 2022 Oscars will forever be remembered not for the film that won Best Picture, but for Will Smith slapping Chris Rock on stage. From a pure ratings and cultural buzz perspective, the incident was a perverse, short-term boon. It dominated the news cycle for weeks and made the Oscars the topic of every water-cooler conversation. However, it also undermined the ceremony’s desired tone of dignified celebration and raised serious questions about the Academy’s crisis management. The intense, divided public reaction also reinforced the show’s position as a cultural lightning rod, for better and for worse.
Read more: Beyond the Box Office: How Streaming is Reshaping the Hollywood Blockbuster
Part 3: The Path to Redemption – A Multi-Pronged Strategy for Relevance
Winning back American audiences cannot be achieved with a single silver bullet. It requires a holistic, long-term strategy that acknowledges the new media reality while reaffirming the core mission of celebrating the magic of movies.
3.1 Bridge the Elitism Gap, Don’t Demolish the Temple
The Academy must find a smarter way to honor popular cinema without devaluing its own awards.
- Strategic Inclusion, Not Ghettoization: Instead of a separate “Popular Film” category, the Academy should continue the trend of nominating a wider range of films for the top prize. The expansion of the Best Picture category to ten slots was a masterstroke for this very reason. It allows for crowd-pleasers like Top Gun: Maverick and Avatar: The Way of Water to compete alongside critical darlings like The Banshees of Inisherin. This gives a much larger audience a horse in the race. They must continue this, ensuring the nominees reflect the full spectrum of cinematic excellence—from the arthouse to the multiplex.
- Celebrate the Crafts of Blockbusters: The technical categories are where popular films traditionally excel. The broadcast should lean into this. Highlight the incredible visual effects, sound design, and score of a Dune or a Avatar with compelling video packages that make the artistry accessible and thrilling to a lay audience. Make the case for why these achievements are worthy of celebration.
3.2 Reimagine the Broadcast for the 21st Century
The three-hour awards show format is a relic. It needs a top-to-bottom reinvention.
- Embrace a Tiered Broadcast Model: Consider a multi-platform approach. A pre-show on YouTube and TikTok targeting a younger demographic with red-carpet fashion, viral moments, and interviews. The main ceremony on ABC (or its streaming successor) could be a tighter, two-hour show focusing on the major categories (Picture, Director, Acting, Writing). Then, a post-show or a simultaneous streaming feed on Disney+/Hulu could feature the full, unedited presentations for all categories, including the crafts, for the cinephiles and industry insiders who want the complete experience.
- Dynamic and Engaging Presentations: The “read the nominees, open the envelope, thank the list of people” formula is stale. Presenters should be given more creative freedom. Use dynamic video packages that don’t just show clips, but explain why a performance or a cinematographic choice is extraordinary. Incorporate behind-the-scenes footage and actor roundtables that have already proven popular online. Make the audience feel like they are gaining insight, not just witnessing a procession.
- Lean into the Unscripted (The Good Kind): The most memorable Oscar moments are often the unplanned ones. While you can’t plan a slap, you can create an environment that feels more spontaneous and less rehearsed. Allow for more genuine interaction between winners and the audience. The “In Memoriam” segment and the honorary awards should be the emotional core of the night, reminding viewers of the profound human connection and history embedded in the art form.
3.3 Reframe the Narrative: From Politics to Passion
The Academy cannot and should not tell winners what to say. Free speech is paramount. However, it can work to reframe the overall narrative of the evening away from political battleground and back to a celebration of the craft of storytelling.
- Focus on the Art: Encourage presenters and winners to speak about the process. How did an actor build their character? How did a screenwriter overcome a narrative challenge? How did a director achieve a specific shot? This focus on craft is inherently inclusive and fascinating. It transcends politics and reminds everyone why they fell in love with movies in the first place.
- Humanize the Nominees: The months-long “awards season” has turned into a grueling, highly strategic campaign. This process makes nominees feel distant and calculating. The broadcast should find ways to break down that wall. Show the nominees as fans of each other’s work, as artists who struggle and triumph. The more relatable they are, the more the audience will invest in their journeys.
3.4 Theatricality is the Antidote to Streaming
In a world of at-home viewing, the Oscars must double down on the one thing streaming cannot replicate: the grandeur of the shared theatrical experience.
- Make it an Event: The ceremony should be a spectacular advertisement for the magic of going to the movies. Use immersive technology, stunning cinematography of the theater itself, and speeches that evangelize the power of a dark room and a big screen. Partner with theaters to offer Best Picture nominee marathons or discounted tickets in the weeks leading up to the show.
- Celebrate the Past to Secure the Future: The Oscars own a century of cinematic history. They should use it. Weave in classic film clips, honor legends, and create segments that draw a direct line from the silent era to the CGI of today. This creates a sense of occasion and legacy that a new Netflix series simply cannot match. It positions the Oscars not as just another TV show, but as the custodians of a cherished cultural tradition.
Conclusion: A Future in the Balance
The Oscars are at a crossroads. The path of least resistance leads to further irrelevance—a niche ceremony for industry insiders and hardcore cinephiles, watched by a dwindling audience on a dying medium. But there is another path.
Winning back American audiences is not about pandering or abandoning artistic integrity. It is about rediscovering the show’s soul. It is about remembering that at its best, cinema is a universal language that can thrill, move, and unite us. The Oscars must become the embodiment of that ideal once more.
The solution lies in a delicate balance: honoring artistic excellence while embracing popular appeal; producing a modern, engaging broadcast while respecting the dignity of the awards; and allowing for diverse voices while focusing on the unifying power of storytelling. It is a Herculean task, but not an impossible one.
The audience hasn’t vanished; it has fragmented. To bring them back, the Academy must meet them where they are—on new platforms, with new expectations—and give them a reason to care again. It must offer not just a awards show, but an irresistible, shared celebration of the magic, the passion, and the enduring power of the movies. The curtain hasn’t fallen yet, but the final act of this dilemma is still being written.
Read more: The 2025 Oscar Race Heats Up: Early Frontrunners and Surprise Contenders
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q1: Why did the Oscars’ ratings start falling in the first place?
There’s no single reason, but a combination of factors: the rise of streaming and on-demand entertainment, the perception that the Oscars favor “Oscar bait” over popular films, the increasing length and slow pace of the broadcast, and the infusion of political and social commentary into the show, which has alienated some viewers.
Q2: What was the “Popular Film” category and why did it fail?
In 2018, the Academy proposed a new category for “Outstanding Achievement in Popular Film” to honor blockbuster movies. It was widely criticized as a desperate, transparent ploy for ratings that would create a second-class tier of awards, devaluing both the popular films and the traditional categories. The backlash was so severe the idea was shelved.
Q3: Has going without a host helped the ratings?
The results are mixed. The hostless ceremonies (2019, 2020, 2021) were often shorter and more streamlined, but some lacked a cohesive energy and comedic center. A strong, well-liked host can generate pre-show buzz and guide the evening effectively, which is why the Oscars have returned to using hosts in recent years with some success.
Q4: What was the controversy around pre-recording some awards?
In 2022, the Academy decided to pre-record eight categories (like Sound and Film Editing) and edit them into the live broadcast to save time. This caused massive backlash from industry professionals, who felt it was a deep disrespect to these essential filmmaking crafts, treating their achievements as less important than the “glamour” categories.
Q5: Can the Oscars ever get back to 40-50 million viewers?
It is highly unlikely. The media landscape has fundamentally changed. With hundreds of channels and endless streaming options, no single television event can command the audience share it did in the era of three major networks. A more realistic and still-successful goal would be to stabilize and gradually grow viewership to the 20-30 million range by creating a must-see event for a modern, multi-platform audience.
Q6: What is the single most important thing the Oscars can do to win back viewers?
There is no single solution, but the most crucial step is to bridge the gap between critical acclaim and popular taste. This means consistently nominating a mix of artistic masterpieces and well-made, culturally resonant blockbusters for Best Picture. When the public has a vested interest in the films being honored, they are far more likely to tune in. This must be paired with a more dynamic and engaging broadcast that respects the audience’s time and intelligence.
