"Object of" vs. "subject of" -- which one is correct? Does it depend on context?

What, exactly, is the difference between the following two sentences? Are they both correct -- or is one considered more correct in certain contexts or constructions?

1. Jim's wailing child was the subject of much scrutiny.

2. Jim's wailing child was the object of much scrutiny.

Each of these usages is ubiquitous, and it's not uncommon to see both within the span of a few sentences. (For example, Google estimates over 60,000 results for "subject of study" "object of study".)

The difficulty seems to be that both words have several senses, and they are somewhat overlapping in this case. As a lover of grammar, I am frustrated that I cannot resolve this question in my mind.

_{(I tried to search to see if this question had already been asked, but I could not find it amongst the many questions concerning pronoun declension and objects and subjects as parts of speech.)}

They're both grammatically correct and accepted.

For me though, and if you would like to dissect the nuance between them,

Both of them mean a "person to whom thought or action is directed"

But object emphasizes:

"a person seen as a focus for feelings, thought etc."

ex. an object of affection/ contempt

While subject:

"one who experiences or is subjected to something"

ex. the helpless subject of their cruelty/ ridicule

In OP's exact context (much scrutiny), it's not really possible to rationalise any difference in meaning. Both forms occur, but subject is about 8 times more common than object. I don't see either as more "correct" than the other.

In the closely-related of much debate, that preference equally strong (and has far more examples in Google Books). I suppose a punctilious person might argue that subject implies "topic", and object implies "purpose", but I think that's clutching at straws.

In short, the meaning nets down to the same thing regardless of which word you use - Jim's wailing child can be subjected to scrutiny, in which case he's the subject. Or he can be the object being scrutinised, if you want to look at it that way (and if you want to adopt a minority position).