Photograph courtesy HBOIt’s “The Pitt” and “Hacks” (and “Widow’s Bay” and “Pluribus”). Those are the best shows of the year—at least, according to Emmy voters. But did they get it right? I called up The New Yorker’s television critic, Inkoo Kang, to check in about today’s nominations—and to find out which shows she finds most exciting right now.The conversation that follows has been edited and condensed.So, how did the voters do?Well, TV is not in the best shape right now. On the one hand, you could say the nominations captured the over-all mid-ness of where things are. On the other hand, they could have done a lot better at capturing what is the best about TV. If you look at the Outstanding Drama and Comedy categories, a lot of the shows are just aiming straight for the middle, and that bums me out. But that’s what you generally expect from the Emmys.What do you mean by aiming straight for the middle?A show like “The Gilded Age” is not trying to give you the best that TV has to offer artistically. It had its best season yet, but it still doesn’t feel intellectually or even emotionally substantial a lot of the time. Another example is “A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms,” which is a really dumbed-down version of “Game of Thrones.”What were the things you felt the Emmys got right? What were you excited about?Oh, lots of things! I didn’t love “Widow’s Bay” personally, but I was glad that a show that is trying to find under-explored areas of the comedy genre got nominated. I thought that was really fantastic. There are a bunch of actors who I’m glad got their due, like Charles Melton in “Beef,” Coleman Domingo in “The Four Seasons,” Connor Storrie for hosting “Saturday Night Live,” and Rhea Seehorn in “Pluribus.”And who got snubbed?O.K., “Industry” is probably the best show on TV, and the fact that it got a total of zero nominations . . .That’s crazy.Yes. Thank you. I think Marisa Abela and Myha’la turned in astounding performances this past season, as they did during the previous season. Kit Harington was also a highlight, and the fact that none of those actors got nominated really tells me that the Emmy voters are still stuck in inertia.I was very sorry to see that Jamie Bell didn’t get a nomination for “Half Man.” He was hands down the best thing about it. Ashley Padilla not getting nominated for her performance on “S.N.L.,” which was by all rights a total breakthrough, was disappointing. I’m perpetually disappointed when Seth Meyers’s show isn’t nominated in the late-night category. And I was disappointed for Cailee Spaeny, from “Beef,” because she was the only member of the central quartet from Season 2 who wasn’t nominated.Even though the second season of “Landman” was a big drop-off from the first, Billy Bob Thornton’s performance is so astounding on that show. I mean, he’s already a very celebrated, very beloved actor, but I was, like, You want to talk about the best on TV? How is he not in the conversation?What did you make of “The Pitt” and “Hacks” leading the pack?I don’t think either of those shows had their best seasons this past year—which is a point in the “Emmy voters always vote for the same stuff over and over” argument. On the one hand, I’m glad that those are the representatives of television that the industry is holding up. On the other hand, they were just not at their best this past year.The last time we talked, in December, you’d been feeling pretty down on the state of TV over all. What has excited you this year?I’m glad there’s still some experimentation happening. There are still shows that make me excited. “DTF St. Louis” is definitely one of them. Also, the second season of “Beef,” which I guess has been really polarizing. I just re-watched that, and I was surprised anew by all the little details and textures in that show. I also just re-watched “The Comeback.” The fact that a show like that exists, where it comes out once every ten years or so to drop in on how this particular character is doing—there’s still some excitement to be had about TV.We’re in an industry contraction, and so it’s just not at the artistic peak that it was some years ago. But that doesn’t mean that the entire medium is completely devoid of artistic swings. For that, as a person who has to cover this stuff, I’m grateful.Editor’s PickWhat Scientists Learned by Eavesdropping on Thousands of PeopleA recent study found that research subjects were speaking tens of thousands fewer words a day over time. Our science columnist Shayla Love writes about what else those recordings revealed—and what she learned by collecting audio from her own life. Read or listen to the story »More Top StoriesThe growing popularity of BookTok has given rise to the “As Seen on TikTok” badge on covers. But does this sticker mean a given book is any good?