pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

Condé Nast, the publisher that owns magazines like Vogue and Vanity Fair, said on Tuesday that it had acquired Pitchfork Media, the company behind the independent music website and quarterly magazine, for an undisclosed sum.

Pitchfork, founded in 1995, has long been one of music’s independent voices, known for unearthing up-and-coming artists, and for its in-depth reviews. The acquisition will take immediate effect.

It gives Condé Nast a stand-alone music publication with a strong editorial voice, said Fred Santarpia, the company’s chief digital officer, who led the acquisition. It brings “a very passionate audience of millennial males into our roster,” he said.

Pitchfork, he said, is profitable, and it boasts a thriving live events business, with events in Chicago and Paris, and robust video offerings — both vital and growing parts of the publishing business. He declined to say how much Condé Nast paid. The quarterly print magazine, The Pitchfork Review, will continue, Mr. Santarpia said.

“Pitchfork is incredibly fortunate to have found in Condé Nast a team of people who share our commitment to editorial excellence,” Ryan Schreiber, Pitchfork’s founder and chief executive, said in a statement. “Their belief in what we do, combined with their additional expertise and resources, will allow us to extend our coverage of the artists and stories that shape the music landscape on every platform.”

The site’s influence has been growing in recent years, and it has developed a reputation for being able to bolster the careers of artists with a positive review.

In an email to its staff, Condé Nast’s chief executive, Bob Sauerberg, said the deal “reinforces our commitment to building Condé Nast’s premium digital network, focusing on distinctive editorial voices and engaging high-value millennial audiences.”

Hi dere very passionate audience of millennial males.

a very passionate audience of millennial males = new board description

if only the ott cld make a video screed telling us sheeple all about corporate control of music journalism mannnnnnnnnnnn

a self-reinforcing downward spiral of passionate millennial males

a clown car full of passionate millennial males

passionate millennial males that are surprisingly vibrant in 2015

"reinforces our commitment to building Condé Nast’s premium digital network"

what does 'premium' mean in that sentence?

it means male

you'd think the owners of reddit would be looking to unload passionate millennial males

The Devil Wears Panda Bear T-Shirts

man that "males" thing is really the worst foot forward

finally, a publication that millennial males can get behind

lol m@tt

or matt

it's like they don't even WANT me

"Conde Nast shares our commitment to the finest in..." "BOYS READ THIS, YAY!"

NO GIRLS

more like dickfork amirite

passionate millennial fails

brb starting a publication for aging passionless females, it will be called "my covers, where I plan to stay for the rest of this week/year/life"

"high-value millennial audiences"

#millenialmales trending

to gorge yourself on more buzzwords, here's another interview with the guy talking about his days at vevo/umg (sets up whatever the opposite of a batsignal is for you-know-who) http://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/1094227/vevo-co-founder-fred-santarpia-talks-about-his-years-at-the-company-new

oh you mean FredSantarpiaVEVO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01WYzsmsGGQ

"millenial males" phrase very depressing, though i suppose they are basing on this on actual user research? i wouldve thought that the audience would've diversified over the years tbh, there are way more women writing for the site than there used to be

also maybe i am naive but i seem to remember shrieber saying that he would never sell? this was maybe 5 years ago or something

So is this what is known as a "Chicago gaffe"?

there are way more women writing for the site than there used to be

this is true but I doubt that directly impacts reader demos

it may not impact reader demos, it's probably the same for every publication, but it was pretty cool being able to live the lie that I am a valued demographic

soooooooooooo what will they be able to do now that they haven't already been doing? seems like they were fine on their own.

Light dollar bills on fire?

maybe more millennial male sports coverage...

calling them a "publication" feels misguided, they're more like a vertically integrated product delivery service at this point

fantasy kickball leagues...

well, the stakeholders will be able to sit on some fat cash maybe

Hormonally challenged vertical publication.

xp good tines over at Pitchfork

more money might mean more Vice-like. more video and adventure man reporting...since they want to target dudes so much.

meanwhile, at vice, gloria steinem is a correspondent now

yeah was just gonna post that thanks to the Raggett siren.

ugh gross

more money might mean more Vice-like. more video and adventure man reporting...since they want to target dudes so much.

All media targets dudes. My guess is the buyers were simply looking to acquire something that would bring in even more, especially ones with disposable income.

For some reason, I'm a little saddened by this -- it takes me by surprise, and I'm not even sure why. For anyone who didn't write there during a period where something like this seemed obv ridiculous, it probably makes all the sense in the world.

i'm more excited by the village voice thing. that could be a good thing!

http://pitchfork.com/news/61621-pitchfork-acquired-by-conde-nast/

if that link had just gone directly to the "monkey drinking his own piss" gif, all would have been forgiven

official "indie music" is no longer indie decree

actually, it seems hard to imagine much would change beyond the things that always change w acquisitions (new upper mgmt, some staff cutting, likely subtle changes in branding over a long period of time). As a writer, I'd be worried that they'd want pitches that would guarantee clicks, as opposed to, say, the new DJ Spinn EP, but I guess we'll see...

Does that mean they might actually review a Taylor Swift album instead of vaguely referencing it's existence in other reviews?

building brands marked by editorial integrity

they say brand a lot

must be from the time they read no logo during a slow period in the late 90s