pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

panda bear rules

I forgot that Pitchfork started with a set of rules that we all know and love

― Whiney G. Weingarten, Sunday, November 6, 2016 7:56 PM (one hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I don't care about the rule. I'm saying they are the ones caring about the apparent rule.

The Apparent Rule of Pitchfork: One Man's Journey through the Aughties

what is the rule?

disregard mainstream commercial culture, maaaan

The "rule" is that it must have relevance to music. That makes sense! But if you're saying "Great, we write a headline with Bill Murray and the Cubs in it because they are singing" then it appears you're looking for ways to meet that requirement via loophole. My entire point was that all of that is silly to me and if they've gotten to that point then why not just allow themselves to write about whatever they want?

Just woke up here, sorry if that reads incoherently.

Gotta say it was weird that the first post that Schrieber did in his Minneapolis basement in 1996 was just this one solemn vow to never cover anything that wasn't specifically about music. They framed the statement, which stands in the New York office to this day and make certain staffers kiss it every morning

isn't one of the lessons from the chives success the fact that bill murray is millennial male catnip

i have a theory that the death of bill murray will be the greatest shared tragedy of our modern times

I'm not confused or concerned just amused. I'm not sure if this is coming across.

Amused that they are breaking a rule that only exists in the head of ILX poster Evan?

there's no rule but it's legit to notice that there used to be a time when they covered music exclusively, which is the reason they became well-known in the first place, and that gradually they are moving toward a model where they frequently repost the same kind of mini-nonstories that 1000 other outlets cover every day, only slightly spinning them so they could conceivably have something to do with a series of pitches, rhythms, and dynamics. it's no big deal, it's not surprising, conde nast owns them and that's always how this was going to work out. but it's not a rule that only exists in the head of ilx poster evan, it's a memory of what a publication used to be like back in its better days, compared to how it is now, that's all. everyone gets that in order to continually grow and make a profit and put on more festivals and all that, they need to post more clickbaity articles. that's how it is most places on the internet these days. but it's fine to step back every once in a while and lament the decline of it all.

Well, yes, obviously, I was just making fun of Even calling it a "rule" which is hilarious and insane

mock mock mocking yon evan's law

*sways*

my brother's subscription to Circus started right when they started having hollywood icons like bucky dent on the cover. he was so pissed.

tbf Bill Murray was in that My Bloody Valentine movie

Amused that they are breaking a rule that only exists in the head of ILX poster Evan?

― Whiney G. Weingarten, Monday, November 7, 2016 10:34 AM (eighteen minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

They aren't breaking a rule. It's as if they have one that they're bound to. The "rule" (a term being used hyperbolically here) is that for them to allow a headline to be published it needs to be, as Karl put it "slightly spun so it could conceivably have something to do with a series of pitches, rhythms, and dynamics". They can post all the newsworthy clickbait they want. I know why they're doing it and I don't care that they are. If they want to put Trump or Bill Murray in their headlines I say they should no longer feel essentially forced to wait until one of them starts singing.

Sorry that I'm not communicating this very well apparently.

think we can all agree that the news section has always been dumb

what kind of music does bill murray like?

i'm gonna guess steely dan

"Breaking: Arcade Fire covers Go Cubs Go"

wu-tang clan, duh

the thing is.. when i was in high school (yes i am an adult) i would have snickered at many "random celeb + hip band" articles and shared them with my friends (yes i had friends) during lunch.. because i was really into music and using musical matters as a source of self-identification/conversation material..

Each weekend, Pitchfork posts a long-read review of an album not previously covered in our archives: The Sunday Review (link in bio). Which albums would you like to see covered in The Sunday Review in 2017? Comment below.

Remember how anti-commenting P4K were? Now they're crowdsourcing reviews through comments.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BMeK-ntBx73/

gonna side with evan on this one, does everyone really think that famous indie music site pitchforkmedia has actually been an avclub-style general entertainment site for the past 15 years? and fwiw i honestly don't care at all that they started chasing tv clicks post-CN takeover, it hasn't made the site better or worse or anything. just seems clear that Evan's right--they usually try to shoehorn some sort of music connection into their TV stories, even when it's laughably minor.

Also this:

think we can all agree that the news section has always been dumb

― tylerw, Monday, November 7, 2016 9:41 AM (five hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

is otm, it's usually just reprinted press releases, right?

Everyone's news section is reprinted/retyped press releases, from Rolling Stone on down.

I'm worried all these stories about Bill Murray and going to push important things like what cover songs Arcade Fire played in concert last week off the main page

If you read the Chainsmokers review without the sneering tone it sounds like a good record? Especially strange that the review includes this:

" and they themselves are not on trial—the music they make is"

And then the review goes on to praise how catchy and well-crafted the music is. And then gives it 3.5 stars.

idgi

also patrick bateman had good taste in music

Chainsmokers have better hair though

Kendrick Lamar and Shaq Go Soap Shopping in New American Express Commercial: Watch

I think it's clear their transition to General Interest Millennial Male has already begun. Between all the Stranger Things and Twin Peaks content, and now stuff like this:

http://pitchfork.com/news/69785-watch-dave-chappelle-resurrect-chappelles-show-characters-for-a-parody-of-the-walking-dead/
http://pitchfork.com/news/69756-dave-chappelle-snl-monologue-weve-actually-elected-an-internet-troll-as-our-president-watch/
http://pitchfork.com/news/69786-watch-dave-chappelle-and-chris-rocks-election-night-snl-sketch/

Which makes sense, since Conde needs them to scale. I just don't understand why The Dissolve had to go... they'll be doing film reviews again soon enough.

lol https://twitter.com/pitchfork/status/796397594016645120

the dissolve had to go because it couldn't scale, which is because pitchfork decided to start a site strictly about film even tho it was clear that the dominant form of culture in america was television

news is different. any blog post post can "scale" inside 24 hours i.e. get a bunch of people to click on it

thought this revive would be about the big news about El-P retiring his red ballcap

meanwhile this is music-related because ... kanye?

http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/7573677/democrat-president-2020-election-bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren

Thats a trade magazine

http://pitchfork.com/news/69866-drake-invites-espns-doris-burke-to-dinner-in-cringeworthy-courtside-interview-watch/

http://pitchfork.com/news/69866-drake-is-gonna-fuck

lol

Over the course of our sprawling phone conversation, it became clear to me why artists—like Santigold, Kylie Minogue, and Charli XCX, with whom he co-wrote half of True Romance—might be attracted to Raisen. He is eccentric and electric, prone to spirited stream-of-consciousness monologues on topics such as the conspiracy of radio, ’70s krautrock, and the virtues of golfing. Discussing methods he’s used in recording, he mentions Brian Eno’s “Oblique Strategies” deck, “power manifestation,” and the Self-Realization Fellowship center near his home in L.A. In fact, Raisen came to collaborate with Gordon only after he and the singer-songwriter Lawrence Rothman experimented with chanting her name. “As you can see,” Raisen says, “I’m super heavy on energy.” (That Raisen and I are both natives of Massapequa, N.Y. was but another cosmic force at work.)

http://pitchfork.com/thepitch/1371-wtf-is-pop-justin-raisen-on-producing-the-future/

made it one and a half paragraphs into this before it turned into abject self-parody. fuck music.

energies are important tho

Do you resent it when people call you a pop producer?

No, I just get a kick out of it. But also, it's 2016. What the fuck is pop, man? I have no clue. Is pop trap? Trap is pop. The Rihanna record is pop. Pop is not even pop anymore. Pop is now experimental. Experimental is now pop.

every sentence i read i'm throwing up in my mouth

http://www.lausd.k12.ca.us/King_MS/Students%20Projects/Animation_html/gif/drseusshopani.gif

lol both the article and the subject are pretty hilarious. i'd kick it w/ that dude for a night

I guess I'm a rebel, but it makes me cringe even watching the VMAs.

That was the sentence that made me really regret not giving up as soon as I saw the goofy-ass photo. Also, I tried listening to the Kim Gordon song and it was shit.

So the Miranda Lambert review seems like a breaking of their policy to not cover any Country music that might end up on being played on country radio.