Emmys Moderator Nate Bargatte sagt

You know what? No. People deserve to thank whoever they want to thank for however long they want (with, like, a 3 minute limit). Trying to guilt people over this is bullshit.

ETA: I’ve been told this was meant as a joke because he’s a comedian,implying he only speaks through jokes. I read the article before I commented and nowhere did I pick up that he joked about doing this or said it jokingly or admitted it was a joke.

The article does have the following words in it, though (on mobile, so formatting might suck):

„And yes, he really is doing this. ‚I’m putting the money up, because the joke is funnier if it’s coming from me. I didn’t want it to be like in the last minute, some company pays for all,‘ Bargatze said. ‚It’s straight up: This is what they’re getting. It’s up to that room how much they want to give ‚em. Or how little they want to give ‚em.'“

So if this was actually a joke, I didn’t get it. And I didn’t get it as funny. And neither did the writer of the article linked in the post

I hope someone runs long to call his bluff

Sounds like a bit.

He also said that he’ll add $1000 for every second under the 45 second allotted time. It’s to encourage shorter speeches to keep the Emmys under the 3 hour timeframe and make money for charity.

This is actually likely to accidentally incentivize people running long. Studies have shown that when you put a cost on something that you usually avoid because of shame and social pressure, that people will just evaluate the cost and, assuming it’s proportional, will just eat the cost to do the behavior.

In the most famous experiment, a daycare implemented a late fee to discourage late pick ups, but it actually increased late pick ups because it put a reasonable cost on them.