I am an avid reader of Slate and an even more avid fan of the Wire. This is the truest form of television that I have seen in my lifetime, other than Roots. Granted, Roots was muted and did not portray the bondage and rampant murder due to the decade of creation, and the fact that it was on Network television. The Wire, on the other hand, does not hold back in its portrayal of a decaying urban environment that exists throughout the United States. I enjoyed your article, but where is the outrage from journalist who cover television towards the EMMY's for not recognizing the most pure character development in at least 30 years. Noone is spared in this show, I mean noone. And that is exactly what happens in our urban areas in 2008. It is unfortunate that a vote for this show to receive an award, is a vote to accept that this type of decay occurs right before our eyes.

One factor holding back "The Wire" when it comes to the Emmys is the show's creator, David Simon. Simon is, by industry standards, a beligerant c---sucker, taking every opportunity to spew the hard cold truth about T.V. to every journalist who asks him a question.

He's also suggested, correctly, that the predominantly black cast holds the show back from mainstream success & industry awards. THIS surely wins him no favor in L.A.

Also, unlike David Chase (who occasionally noted that 99% of T.V. was garbage & that he depised network executives), Simon is not a carreer T.V. man - he stepped into T.V from another field, produces from the East Coast on Cable, and then hold court on all the failings of Network Television. I'm sure that Simon alone would keep The Wire from ever getting Emmy recognition.

When you look at the other shows that consistently win Emmy's every year, I would argue that winning one is far from a badge of honor. I am fine with the fact that most people don't watch or appreciate The Wire, because most people watch terrible TV.

Well, there is a downside to not winning Emmys, which is that the recognition of being an Emmy winner can bring more eyeballs to your show--good for advertisers and a nice, long life for a network show, good for subscribers for a premium-cable show, and good for advancing a social cause for this particular show.

It doesn't always work as a marketing tool--Arrested Development didn't jump in the ratings after winning Best Comedy following its first season--but it can help. And I think mainstream TV viewers aren't as biased against TV awards as they are against film awards ("I've never even heard of these movies!"), so you don't get that "snob critics like it, but I heard that movie was terrible" reaction common to Oscar winners.