Pitchfork Reviews Reviews

read upthread. there's a whole thing about him posting from the loos at work.

Pretty sure he's admitted to writing most of these on the subway/train/whatever via BlackBerry on the way into work.

^

It's not necessarily GREAT WRITING but I like that he has his own distinctive voice, and is so full of energy and enthusiasm. Very fun to read, and while the sentences themselves are not brilliantly constructed, I think he does a fine job of really hitting home on his main points in each post. Especially the longer essays, not the Pfork reviews reviews.

It's compelling, but not good. Like a car crash.

It's too personal, like any other blog. Interesting but it basically reads like a diary. Plus I don't need to read about the President's motorcade and schedule unless it's a press release. Too many weirdos out there.

I think the blog would be better if he stopped posting about Pitchfork reviews and confined his comments about that site to the occasional post, posted less frequently, and edited his stuff a bit more. Not too much more editing, because it's apparent that his off-the-cuff, brain dump, highly enthusiastic and earnest style of writing is a huge part of his appeal. But some editing.

Plus I don't need to read about the President's motorcade and schedule unless it's a press release.

You've gotta be kidding. As much as it's not GOOD WRITING, this PRR shit is infinitely more exciting to read than a White House press release!

just burst out laughing because I realized I probably read his blog more than I read P4k reviews these days u_u

If you were really driving a van in a motorcade (is it that easy?), you should keep your mouth shut. You don't want to give the impression that the president's security is a joke.

Okay, I am working my way through all of this. Anyway, I am horrified that the New York Times and the Washington Post would cover an amateur BLOG. Also the NYT article is really bad, and I'm not a huge Pitchfork defender, I just think they serve their market well. But what an ass the NYT writer is for this:

"Regarding reviews, “there’s definitely a drive to be comprehensive,” he said, though one that’s limited by the interests of the site’s staff and by its vision of its readers’ interests. There’s barely any mainstream rock, country or Latin music and only selective engagement with hip-hop, electronic and world music."

i.e. they're "prejudiced", especially against "Latins".

I am horrified that the New York Times and the Washington Post would cover an amateur BLOG.

why? and i don't think the accusation of racial prejudice is really present in the quote you pulled. it reads more like a snarky but non-condemnatory statement on pitchfork's limited range of interests, relative to the idea that its coverage is "comprehensive" (wherever that comes from).

i.e. they're "prejudiced", especially against "Latins".

― i just like barbecue rib, whatever (u s steel), Friday, September 3, 2010 4:45 AM (23 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

wtf are you talking about

Pitchfork would look foolish to pander to some snotty NYT writer and his very powerful and often biased audience by including, say, 25% Latin music or 40% hip-hop. Selectivity is a better approach and when I look at the front page I DO see some hip-hop and occasionally world music. Pitchfork is not one person and you are unprofessional and a bad writer when you use terms like "limited range of interests". It sounds like a character judgment.

Pitchfork just makes it easier to learn about new independent rock / pop and the latest hip-hop is usually in there.

Character judgments are unprofessional and tiresome. Racism is implied, after all there is a history of critics either implying or outright accusing "indie" of being white and even racist.

I assume that many of us attended college or have even attempted to write professionally, I have attended journalism classes and even thought of being a journalist myself. Describing Pitchfork in the NYT as ignoring Latin releases is implying that they are "too white" or culturally biased. I expect adults to not harass a person just because it isn't literally spelled out. If you are capable of reading the NYT I expect you to have some sophistication with regard to what the writer implies.

Character judgments are unprofessional and tiresome.

max works for gawker fyi so

you are unprofessional and a bad writer when you use terms like "limited range of interests".

i dunno, it strikes me as accurate though, again, somewhat snarky. within acceptable tolerances, though. and pitchfork's coverage of country and latin music really is pretty limited.

then again, i have never attempted to write professionally, attended journalism classes or thought of being a journalist myself, so i'm probably not up to speed.

Yeah, Gawker. Should I be afraid or something? He's still wrong. Saying that pitchfork's coverage of country and latin "is pretty limited" sounds like a character judgment, it is a biased remark. If it were merely on a message board it might be harmless but this was published in the NYT.

you are performing quite a close read on that ny times article

you say you'd prefer something more fair and balanced?

it is a biased remark.

in a newspaper? god forbid!

i hope the nyt's webmaster made clear the article contained views -- or, in this case, verifiable facts -- that not everyone would agree with.

Having taken an actual journalism class, one ought to know that it is expected that the NYT is better than that. Excuse me sir, are you interested in getting into a detailed argument with me here? Because I don't like taking too much space in a message board and I'm sorry about that.

I do think your notion that bias is acceptable in the NYT is, uh, unintelligent. Sorry. Newspapers and their power ought to be taken to task.

By the way I am not intimidated by you and you are forcing me to write too much on this thread. It is sad you don't respect your own readership by explaining your own curious views.

x-post to I am legend, this is not clear, the author writes as if he is objective.

not sure if ur trolling or not

maybe eat an apple, go for a walk. i dunno what timezone you're in.

I would assume that someone who cares enough to defend their view with complete sentences isn't trolling.

Of course I am not trolling, I have an opinion I care about and have thought about.

i for one thank my lucky stars that someone has the courage to take the newspapers to task

man this mahnola dargis review is totally biased

Wow, sarcasm is so respectful. You identify with and defend the NYT without feeling you have to write more than a sentence. That makes you a bully.

Also, when are you going to write a thoughtful remark. You make another insinuation, for someone who loves the NYT so much you sure are thoughtless. I don't "think highly of myself" as having "courage", do you always come to message boards with a chip on your shoulder.

I mean, you do your own opinion a disservice when you refuse to defend your own reaction or engage people like a human being. Why then should I find you convincing. Your style is little better than a high school bully.

this is n/l

where did u come from

umm, if you feel you're being bullied, i seriously envy how little you know about being bullied

is us steel pitchfork reviews reviewsbro?

seems to be nytimes articles reviewsbro

I have attended journalism classes and even thought of being a journalist myself.

^^ needs to reach meme status imo

Excuse me sir, are you interested in getting into a detailed argument with me here? Because I don't like taking too much space in a message board and I'm sorry about that.

actually this is better

like i am sure that you are good people and all, us steel, but you seem to be inferring nefariousness from NYT times which i honestly feel is not there. no offense intended.

Experts Fear Mideast Talks Are Too Ambitious
By ISABEL KERSHNER
Published: September 2, 2010

JERUSALEM — As the Israeli and Palestinian leaders pledged at the peace summit meeting in Washington this week to try to resolve the core issues that have long divided their people and bloodied the land, a growing number of stakeholders here in Israel worried that the two sides were aiming too high.

this is how it's done: EXPERTS fear the talks are too ambitious. me? nyt reporter? could not say. no feeling one way or another. just gonna write it up using the neutral and nonjudgemental medium we like to call english.

no offense nrq but... have you ever taken a journalism class?

or even thought about being a journalist yourself?

because im not sure youre qualified to have this discussion

Let's review the press, shall we?

The NYT article is inaccurate. Here is the Chicago Tribune article linked to through Wikipedia ( a much fairer, less curmudgeonly and better researched article):

But Pitchfork's rave review for Radiohead's highly anticipated "Kid A" album in fall 2000 brought an influx of new readers from other band Web sites and message boards. Though the writing on the site remains wildly erratic, it is fervent; the most hostile reviews are written with the passion of a freshly jilted lover berating her ex. And the rave reviews carry weight with readers looking for the next big thing.

Kid A: not mainstream "rock".

x-post to "i am legernd" (your opinion toward the media is passive and cynical...I am just trying to be helpful in indicating that actual journalism programs don't recommend certain approaches). Anyway, mainstream newspapers write bad or misleading headlines all the time, that doesn't mean we the readership should let it slide.

I rest my case that ONE NYT article is inappropriate, thoughtless and inaccurate. I am just horrified that they did something so unprofessional and this isn't the first time, either.

contenderizer, I have seen this attitude toward blogs or so-called "indie" sites TOO many times from allegedly authoritative news sources like the New York Times.

Is inferring nefariousness a crime? You don't care enough to make a convincing argument to the contrary.

you are an actual nut

but i dont like taking too much space in a message board

http://yessteelecan.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/peanut1.jpg

For the record, I think there is plenty of professional, thoughtful writing in the NYT. I take the time to read it. This isn't an example of that. I would think that being shocked the NYT would do something so foolish would indicate that I expect better of them.

http://orangenuts.com/images/the_actual_nut.jpg

this is all because the nyt said that pitchfork had 'a limited range of interests' or

i think it's more about how much they hate latins

both of these seem to be pretty inarguable imo

I have attended journalism classes and even thought of being a journalist myself.

IRL LOL