pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

http://pitchfork.com/thepitch/1194-10-great-old-concerts-you-can-legally-stream-in-high-quality/

Ah. I should have searched for http://pitchfork.com/thepitch/1194-10-great-old-concerts-you-can-legally-stream-in-high-quality/ .

or "concerts"

i believe the kids these days find articles via "hashtags" and "emojis"

lots of kids today searching for articles about old concerts

#old #stevereich #basho

i figured it was under the pitch section, but the pitch section is nowhere to be found on the page. if you cmd+f "the pitch", the only hit is the link at the bottom of the page for the pitchfork review.

the pitch seems to be a subsection of the latest so it's two pages away when i feel like it used to be a main front page thing. no wonder i couldn't find it.

also i searched for "archive" and "archive.org" initially figuring it would search the body text. also search "elliott smith" seeing as i knew that was one of the concerts highlighted, so figured it would probably be tagged. is their search shit then too?

Actually "elliott smith" is an artist in this story but not a tag, which are only "bootleg" and "Invisible Hits", I guess that's a further subcategory within The Pitch within The Latest within Pitchfork. Obviously.

I think Pitchfork is probably churning out too much and too varied formats to be very well organised yet, and probably are way less concerned with their archive than their front page. A pity though.

I think Pitchfork is probably churning out too much and too varied formats to be very well organised yet

Everything is driven by social media these days, so their lack of "organization" is, in fact, a good organizing principle for having a successful, well-trafficked website

whiney o.t.m. weingarten

their lack of "organization" is, in fact, a good organizing principle for having a successful, well-trafficked website

I'm not sure I get what you mean?

Either way, I think I should probably have said "well archived" rather than "well organized".

Secret Pitchfork Features, Use These Seven Tricks to Find Them!

Do you idiots not use google

fuck google

South London musician Benjy Keating is signed to the acclaimed independent dancehall label Mixpak, where he makes a strange and subdued DIY bedroom-pop version of dancehall.

― de l'asshole (flopson), Tuesday, 21 June 2016 01:20 Bookmark

i still dunno why lucas dipasquale isnt signed to ovo. actually too real i guess

If I'm on a site that has a search function I don't expect to have to use google to find something on said site, no.

I would say that searching for something on a specific site using google works better than using a site's search function approximately 99% of the time

it's true

for instance site:ilxor.com pitchfork

this is basic digital literacy, or should be

That's dumb. The workaround should never be the solution.

as CCR taught us: keep on googlin'

yeah site: is an ill way of searching for stuff on the internet 2 thumbs up

That's dumb. The workaround should never be the solution.

― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, June 23, 2016 5:13 PM (12 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

lol

every site should have an in-house search engine as good as the best search engine in the world

or they could just label their posts

https://media.giphy.com/media/NbHxEgD4H6jZK/giphy.gif

Shit's gettin mad boolean up in here

Showing 0 results for “"More like Pitchdork, amirite?"”

http://giving.yale.edu/sites/default/files/imce/BoolaTakesManhattanSmall.JPG

bickin' back, bein boolean

every site should have an in-house search engine as good as the best search engine in the world

― de l'asshole (flopson), Thursday, June 23, 2016 5:27 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Yes, they should. You can add a google search box to a website. There is no reason to have a crappy search function.

Bad search is v retro and #vaporwave digging the aesthetics

They've got videos set on autoplay, and since the news loads in a constant stream, as you scroll down the news page, it starts every single video until they're all playing on top of each other. very "altered zones"

i think those are bet's embed settings but idk

I think you're right.

took 2 bylined reporters to team up for this investigative piece

http://pitchfork.com/news/66462-metallica-star-in-hilarious-luxury-menswear-campaign/

damn, that truly is... hilarious

they look fine. man, that bass player has the face of ages. like an ancient rock or tree or something.

he produced & funded that new jaco pastorius doc that's on netflix, seems like a nice guy

i've seen plenty of hilarious luxury menswear campaigns in my time and that was the most hilarious-est

Apparently, they've been doing "classic" album reviews on Sundays. While I'm not opposed to the albums they've covered thus far, I still find the idea of "in retrospect" commentary from a source as notoriously fickle as Pitchfork to be an extremely slippery slope.

http://pitchfork.com/news/66495-pitchforks-next-sunday-review-pulps-different-class/

And the "announcement" of the upcoming review among the site's own news feed strikes me as being in bad taste.

a slope to what?

idk but it sure is slippery

Last couple of weeks: '12 staffers pick an old song they discovered', '8 staffers share their favourite concerts', '17 staffers name their fav summer song'. Arbitrarily numbered listicles are lame, they sure as hell got told to do more listicles.

I do miss the regular features they used to run. No room for those in Buzzfork, I guess.

I mean, every venue is gonna have to balance out this type of shit with more substantive stuff, everyone has to do it. You see MTV News which is trying to do good stuff find that balance, you see even formerly "prestige" outlets like the Atlantic and Salon do it...Forbes that's basically all they do. You literally HAVE to because that's the type of shit that gets shared that's the type of stuff that gets a lot of comments, traction on Facebook etc. It's pretty easy to be haughty about it like omg every site should be the Quietus and do 2000 word interviews dude from the Associates or oral histories of the African desert blues tape trading scene of the 1980s but people click on this stuff.

so the good venues are gonna try to do the stuff that pays the bills, do the stuff they care about and then hope that at least some of the good work goes "viral"

and also think about what you SAY you actually read on the internet and what you ACTUALLY read vs what you see a title of on Twitter that looks good and has been retweeted by someone you know so you just retweet it cuz you get the gist of it from the title and don't even read it

"It's pretty easy to be haughty about it like omg every site should be the Quietus and do 2000 word interviews dude from the Associates or oral histories of the African desert blues tape trading scene of the 1980s but people click on this stuff."

You could simply give these kinds things clickbaity titles! I wonder if that would work.

These 11 Oral Histories of the African Desert Blues Tape Trading Scene of the 1980s Will Absolutely Destroy You, and Here's Why

kind of think that's what Dangerous Minds does -- clickbait for the captain beefheart crowd.