Sometimes, contests aren't really contests. Sometimes, people who are winners are already winners. Sometimes, losers aren't losers.
Such is the case with the Academy Awards - and other awards shows.
That's why they say "and the Oscar goes to" instead of "and the winner is." Somebody realized that they were already winners, and God forbid we hurt the feelings of a multi-millionaire who has the world on a string by inferring that he is a loser by declaring someone else a winner.
We're big on awards. We give out Grammy's, Emmy's and other awards to people in the entertainment industry who earn more money than ten people together. We get wrapped up in who wins and loses - er...wins and doesn't win ... to the extent that we have 4-hour television shows that encourage people on the east coast to stay up until after midnight to find out which rich bastard won a Best Director Oscar or which film that already took in $400 million of your money is given the exclamation point of an award. It's an odd behavior pattern.
Is it necessary to give awards to people and things who are already society's winners? What's the point?
On Monday morning the winners will be headline news on the local newspaper, and your TV news will run a feature on the winners. Somewhere, a critic will bemoan the non-winners and say that they were all deserving.