What the dilly with Pitchfork?

Point being: If they didn't try and project so much attitude about such industry issues, I don't think the system described above would even be an issue. I suppose they're too busy pretending to be Limp Bizkit fans in the Reader Mail section to notice this.

Full disclosure: I once attempted to contribute to Pitchfork and quickly decided that I very much did not want to contribute to Pitchfork, so perhaps some of that animosity is lingering.

Sure they're hypocrites and snobs, but that's what makes them so loveable. Even though the quality of the reviews is questionable, I have to admit that I have been intorduced to quite a few things that I wouldn't have found otherwise thanks to the 'fork. If they can make a couple of bucks by hosting a few mp3's a month, more power to them.

well, you did. what's wrong with making a little money? I doubt you're an anti-capitalist anarchist, so let's not reinforce the indie that indie = nonprofit. Just look at how well Fugazi have done on their own business model. Melissa's comment was pretty much accurate -- Ryan Schreiber is hardly rolling in dough.

Sorry for the late response, just noticed this thread.

1) Nice to keep comparing Dabrye with Prefuse 73 without taking the time to mention that Dabrye co-produced some tracks on One Word Extinguisher and Instrumentl came out on Prefuse's Eastern Developments.

2) "...who spends 96 percent of his waking life practicing the "furrowed brow" in the mirror while reading No Logo and taking notes." That's seriously the best put-down you could come up with?

3) At least spell TADD Mullinix's name right you clowns.

Pitchfork makes the level of discourse on ILM actually seem intelligent. Hope those MP3 sales are going well.

Do you (or someone else using an address starting with nineoclockdrop in 2002 in Ann Arbor) happen to know him (from Ann Arbor) personally?

And Stan, if you googled a little bit harder you might realize that I haven't exactly hidden my involvment. But that doesn't change the fact that this was a crap review.

Sure, and I bet they read their email as well.

*not a real word

-- Nitsuh (nt...) (webmail), August 24th, 2001 8:00 PM. (link)

awesome. ilm can be like an old high school yearbook sometimes.

I don't think Pitchfork could be any more in touch with the kids today. Kids today are basically consumers. Musically, they don't care about indie cred, where it comes from, how it's made, etc. - they just want to find it, rate it, and download it. Politically, they pick up pet causes, follow their favorite blogs, pick their favorite candidates, etc. - they're political consumers, browsing through the market of political ideas - but there are no movements. The bands aren't into politics, the kids could basically give a shit ... like seriously, name one thing they could rally around. (Iraq doesn't count, we blew that chance four years ago.)

-- fongoloid sangfroid (mikeoptin...), Yesterday 9:28 PM. (sanskrit) (later)

so so so true.

Pitchfork and the blogging culture in general (yeah, I know - Pitchfork are more of an online mag than a blog) are, I think, way too new for anyone to make that kind of judgement call about them. Remember, you're looking at vintage Rolling Stone with the benefit of historical hindsight. Come back to Pitchfork in fifteen years' time, then you'll be able to have a clear view of their cultural & social impact, whatever it may be.

Kids today are basically consumers.

You could make that argument at just about any point in the last 50 years, hell, in the last century.

Musically, they don't care about indie cred, where it comes from, how it's made, etc. - they just want to find it, rate it, and download it.

Or is it more that "indie cred" is an obsolete measure of authenticity, and that something has replaced it??? Maybe blog cred is where it's at?

(Sorry to conflate two different posters, but I was really intrigued by the post-and-response!)

Where?

Note the date. 9/11 changed everything, man.

9/11 changed everything, man.

So true, Nitsuh. :)

I don't buy the apologizing for today's music culture, both consumers and kids and pf alike. There have certainly been periods in the past where things have been "wide open" in terms of upheaval and opportunities and the like. Assuming that the interweb has done for music culture what, say, the 60s or punk or even "grunge" did in the past (to name a few rockist examples), the fact of the matter is that for the most part today's music writing is a dull and lazy enterprise written for kids who are dull and lazy.

One reason that Pitchfork hasn't produced the next Hunter S. Thompson is partially because there are no space limitations in online publishing. So, RS publishing the entirity of Fear and Loathing was a BIG DEAL. It's not a big deal if some just-out-of-undergrad music writer gets his 100 word review put up on PF (at about 2 cents a word, right?).

But the real problem is that no one even bothers to put in the effort. I don't care at all if someone hates the Dabrye record. I'm just sick of reading shitty, lazy psuedo-journalism that, in this case, is about an artist who actually does work hard at his craft. I mean, at least spell his name right! That takes 2 seconds to fact check.

Or maybe it's the old thing of just because everyone CAN do it, that doesn't mean that everyone should. I gave up on music journalism a long time ago because I realized I wasn't any good at it. Sometimes I wish that 98% of the writers out there would do the same thing.

but right now i'm mainly trying to figure out whether bush really believes his high-horse speech right now about saving embryos, or whether he actually knows that the ones that could have been used for stem-cell research are going to be DESTROYED ANYWAY. like: "oops, something good almost happened on my watch! finally time to bust out that veto"

This is a shitty, lazy excuse for why pseudo-journalism is bad, though your point regarding copyediting is good.

Wrong.

And Marc, don't you remember the snowflake babies ... ? All of those embryos will be implanted in a loving mother (in a heterosexual marriage) who can't conceive kids of her own.

And then a lot of them will be miscarry.

I mostly made the joke, though, because of the word "next." Hunter S. Thompson did not write that Kentucky Derby piece while in the womb -- he (and his theoretical "next" equivalent) wrote stuff far less glamorous and interesting than Pitchfork features along the way. (Saying Pitchfork isn't publishing "the next Thompson" is like reading Bob Christgau's early Voice story about macrobiotic diets and saying "this guy sure won't ever be an important music critic" -- it's just mixed-up and meaningless.)

I was trying to say this upthread, but you've phrased it much better than I did.

i don't know if anyone mentioned this, but i do remember them putting up some kind of pissed off/satirical thing the day after bush won the second time

the page-filling ipod ad is a cause for concern...

How's your website doing, abanana?

― ⓔⓥⓞⓞ (Whiney G. Weingarten), Monday, March 9, 2009 5:08 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

really dude?

hahahahah

I'm just saying, the other thread is filled with critiques like "I don't like this redesign because..." and abanana is just dropping some YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING backseat driving that I thought was silly, so i went for the easy zing

hang on - i could see how that could be taken the wrong way - i meant, really, the "if you're such a great critic how come you don't have a #1 album" criticism?

but ya, the sarcastic "way to go" criticism is kind of annoying i agree

abanana's gripe has been one of the more precise and reasonable ones about the resign that I've seen so far

reDEsign

>the page-filling ipod ad is a cause for concern...

It's covering up the pictures of babes in American Apparel tighty whities!

i already made that criticism and kenan told me to get an RSS reader

it was intense

I think it looks fine - just don't click on anything.

So far I've attempted to click or type in something 7-8 times, with only one success.

i'm assuming stuff like clickability is just technical issues still being worked out (whereas the front page layout is probably going to stay as it is right nwo)

it's covering up the pictures of babes in American Apparel tighty whities!

How do I get this ad? My ads want me to buy an iPod.

i'm assuming stuff like clickability is just technical issues still being worked out (whereas the front page layout is probably going to stay as it is right nwo)

― Diddyocracy (some dude), Monday, March 9, 2009 5:18 PM (23 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

interesting.

s1ock, and on top of lazy crit, he's RONG, since music criticism in general is increasingly less useful to internet users, and Pfork IS actually focusing on the new key features for 2k9: news, exclusive multimedia and Best New Music recommendations.

if you're gonna jump on typos i'm gonna have to volley a "really dude?" right back atcha

ya i agree with whiney, music criticism is gay and old

Oh No!
Server Error

Something has gone awry, but we've been notified and are (probably) working on fixing what broke.

intersting design choice, making the site not load at all; curious to see where this goes

Hay guys let's just focus on the larger threat here

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/images/users/uploads/8073/watchzsquid.jpg

guys i had a classic "you are" zing loaded up for max here and you're bringing in the cotdamn squid

if you're gonna jump on typos i'm gonna have to volley a "t-t-t-t-totally dude?" right back atcha

― Diddyocracy (some dude), Monday, March 9, 2009 1:19 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

couldn't find a way to work "yahhh trick yahhh" into that, huh

I didn't see the other thread. I stand by my complaint.

don't let the h8rs break ya, a banana!

hey so who likes skinny jeans?

eh?

if you're gonna jump on typos i'm gonna have to volley a "really dude?" right back atcha

― Diddyocracy (some dude), Monday, March 9, 2009 5:19 PM (8 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

my "new world order" jpg didnt appear :(

haha ok fair enough

My friend speculates that they rushed it out in order to get that ad up.

according to company who designed the new Pitchfork website, their marketing speak: Tangible Worldwide is an "Interdisciplinary design agency"

Tangible Worldwide
http://www.tangibleworldwide.com

New Pitchfork site and identity. Check out what we've been working on the last 9 months!

I am surprised Pitchfork / Tangible Worldwide haven't used one of the following social sharing services: Add to Any, AddThis, or ShareThis

also no sign of RSS

So Tangible Worldwide have spent 9 months working on developing a new website and they can't deliver basics like Social Sharing and RSS implementation at the launch

there is also some similarity in information design / user experience of:

Pitchfork
http://pitchfork.com/

and

DrownedinSound
http://drownedinsound.com/

Wait, when did Pitchfork bring back track reviews? Is that just with this redesign, or have I missed it?

pretty sure it was gone for a good long time before today. tbh i was hoping they'd stay gone but hopefully there's a different approach this time.

What was your issue with it as it existed in 2004-06 or whenever?

we did not receive warning of this!

i can't believe pitchfork redesigned and didnt bother to submit themselves over entirely to rateyourmusic

there's no way i could answer that question without igniting old 'lol crack rap' beefs.

Ah, that's sufficient. I always liked the idea of track reviews and was bummed when they were subsumed into the Forkcast. This new format of track reviews for songs that warrant commentary and the Forkcast for just random audio/video clips seems promising.

If 'best new music' is a major concern for the now, why is there an album reviewed newly for that category today that you would never know it without scrolling over some album cover thumbnails?

ugh while are people getting so focused on music criticism when theres an awesome ipod ad

why

probably because the dude with the ipod isn't watching the gratuitous sex scene from watchmen

lol you guys read pitchfork

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahayeah lol

can you imagine reading a HAHAHA Walkmen HAHAHAHA review on HAHAHAHA Pitchfork?

damn guys. you're killing me here!

ya, what goes on here is way better than pitchfork

saw the walkmen movie this weekend, pretty disappointing not as good as grpahic novel

who's walking the Walkmen?...(prolly Tim Wakefield)...

im too cool for pfork B-) what u think about THAT

If 'best new music' is a major concern for the now, why is there an album reviewed newly for that category today that you would never know it without scrolling over some album cover thumbnails?

I was wondering that too. Probably because it's a reissue/comp?