±«Óãtv

I don't know whether it's always been this way and I'm just getting old and out-of-touch and forgetting that awards are mostly For The Kids, or whether it's just that I keep more track of the whole process, so I actually care who was nominated for the Mercury Music Prize, against all reason, thus it makes me angry when good albums or artists get overlooked.

Sometimes I think I've just become too much of a muso snob to understand that not everyone cares about all genres being fairly represented all the time, and just want bands or artists they like to win things, but if that's the case, then you'd think I'd be right at home with the Mercury, the music snob prize, not grinding my teeth at the list of nominees. And I doubt I'm the only one.

Britain and Ireland (the areas included in the Mercury Prize's 'net') have very fertile music scenes. I might not like a lot of the music personally, and I would have thought you'd be very, very hard-pressed to find anyone that does, but that doesn't stop it being there. There have been hundreds and thousands of albums released over the last year.

The Mercury, in its 12-year history, has never made everyone happy. It makes no claims to be populist, indeed it styles itself as precisely the opposite, despite often dealing with some of the most successful albums of a particular year and sometimes being the factor to make a new artist's career, with the relevant publicity jetting them straight into the mainstream.

(Antony & the Johnsons being a perfect example)

However, the prize takes pains to remain aloof, judged by a select group of experts. And McFly never seem to release their albums in the right timeframe for it.

The Mercury is a prize for new music, so no covers albums (including releases of classical music by, say, Mozart, etc.) will be eligible but everything else is, as far as I'm aware. The prize panel claim the award is particularly for groundbreaking or particularly radical music, although it has often been awarded to bands or artists in well-established genres; take Amy Winehouse's win last year, with a faux-Motown album.

That said, there's generally a spread of various genres over the prize nominees, although it's often indie-dominated and it's often full of what I, personally, would describe as smug, safe choices accompanied by the odd 'crazy' offbeat album to create an illusion of edginess and relevance.

Make of all these observations what you will, remember that they're only my opinions and let's look at this year's nominees. Which, announced on Tuesday, are stone cold facts:

(that retro lady singer business)

(apocalyptic indie rock)

(atmospheric, decayed dubstep, my favourite of the set)

(gentle, sad indie-pop, Fraser's favourites)

(chart topping leading lady of Brit Soul, backed by Chartblog's Steve)

(semi-folky, complex singer-songwriter)

(self-conscious '80s homage by indie types)

(the token classical/jazz entry)

(mournful geordie folk)

(zzzzz -WHUPS, I MEAN stalwarts of UK alternative scene)

(rock you and your dad may both like)

(third nomination for Him Out Of The Arctic Monkeys)

At least that list doesn't include the View, I suppose, unlike last years but there seem to be some glaring admissions there.

I don't care if Portishead have been nominated every blimmin' year since time began (which was in 1996, for the Mercury) there's no reason they shouldn't be on there, given what has been nominated, and surely Roisin Murphy was a dead cert?

(Here's Portishead doing 'The Rip')

What about Enter Shikari? Wiley? Bands with unprintable names such as let's-call-them You Slot! and Duck Buttons? High Contrast? Los Campesinos? The Ting Tings? Kate Nash?

The inclusion of Neon Neon at all completely mystifies me, too; Gruff Rhys is a well-respected musician but 'Stainless Style,' while immensely enjoyable, is just a deliberate pastiche of blatant 80s influences and hardly something demonstrating Hot New Music.

Although really, that could be said of nearly all the entries. Even Burial has been described as nostalgic, using muffled jungle beats and echos of garage to create something that sounds like a time-capsule being opened fifty years from now. And that's easily as edgy as this set gets. Every album harks back to a previous style or era of music, with the possible exception of Radiohead, who merely hark back to earlier incarnations of themselves.

Or amirite? Maybe I am just too picky; what would you, the ChartBloggers, have nominated, or do you agree with the judges?

Do you care what prizes like the Mercury say, or are they just back-patting exercises for an industry which is probably already a little too obsessed with itself?

Speak your thoughts below, please...