As someone who spent ten years working in the recording industry, I may be able to offer a little insight into how the Grammy Awards actually work.
As defined by The Recording Academy:
The GRAMMYs are the only peer-presented award to honor artistic achievement, technical proficiency and overall excellence in the recording industry, without regard to album sales or chart position.
Many have complained that “Mainland voters are ignorant of Hawaiian music.” But as stated, voters are professionals in the recording arts. They judge musical quality, regardless of celebrity, residence, sales, air-play or race.
I suppose that depends on your definition of who's a "peer" or a "professional".
The article mentions "11,000-plus voting members" of NARAS. To become a voting member you must have "X" number of "technical or creative credits" on commercially released tracks.
While some artists certainly qualifies as "peers", there are many other voting members you probably hadn't thought about. A guy who works in the artwork department or writes liner notes gets a credit. It was typical for A&R reps to be given associate producer credit even if they never stepped foot into the studio for the recording.
And here's a real gem... handclaps. Yes, it was not uncommon for the label to round up a bunch of people to enter the studio to do handclaps on a track. Or whack a cowbell at the right time. I knew one secretary who got credit for a scream on a heavy metal track.
In short, the major record labels are known to pad their voting ranks. Offical memos are distributed with the label's nominees and employees are encouraged to vote the party line.
Now, I was never a voting member of NARAS, but I was a voting member of a couple other associations that bestow awards and it worked the same way (my memberships were bought and paid for by the label I worked for). If a label had more than one nominee in a category, the powers that be decided who they wanted to win and encouraged you to vote for that artist.
Of course, when push comes to shove, there's no one standing over you as you fill out your ballot. I always voted my conscience.
According to Wikipedia, "After nominees have been determined, final voting ballots are sent to Recording Academy members. They may then vote in the general fields and in no more than eight of the 30 fields. NARAS members are encouraged, but not required, to vote only in their fields of expertise."
So that guy who does artwork or liner notes for classical releases (or who handclapped their way into a voting membership paid for by the company) can vote in numerous fields, none of which involve any of his expertise.
This is where name recognition comes in. Tia Carrere is a known commodity as an actress as well as a singer and she definitely has an advantage there.
It's like in elections, there is no qualification to vote (aside from being registered). I always try to do my homework and if there's a particular race or issue I don't know enough about to make an informed decision, then I'll skip voting on it. But a lot of people probably just look at candidate names and automatically vote for one based on perceived ethnicity or name recognition.
And that's what happens with Grammy voting as well. I can understand the backlash against Justin Bieber, as most of the voting members probably consider themselves more sophisticated than to vote for some teeny-bopper star.
In the recent NBA All-Star weekend, Bieber won MVP for the celebrity game, based solely on his fans voting for him. That's not a fair vote either.