pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

"redemption propaganda" is how i'd describe his previous album too

saw SNL, why does he dress like he's selling drugs outside the Anger Management tour?

because he's a fucking moron?

he’s hilarious, just look at the man

A long piece titled We Didn’t Need the High Fidelity TV Show starts off by talking at length about how retrograde the book & movie were; spends a few paragraphs talking about how the new TV series (starring Zoe Kravitz) is better; but then -- citing the thesis of an older NY Times article -- concludes (again at length) that the show is nonetheless a drag, because it uses a gender-switch in an attempt to absolve the source material of its sins.

I guess this is a totally valid way to critique a TV show (and it's not poorly written)... but like the Bieber thing, it had me wondering, Who is this being written for?

FWIW, the answer to the article’s core question —

Is High Fidelity really so beloved (or its brand name so powerful) that they couldn’t have started from scratch on a series about music obsessives who aren’t exclusively straight white men?

Why spend all this time, money, and energy updating and changing the gender on source material that, in hindsight, is pretty dodgy about women? https://t.co/gKpWJ33b2Y

— Pitchfork (@pitchfork) February 14, 2020

It’s absolutely bananas to try and score woke points on High Fidelity for its toxic whiteboy masculinity when ... that’s ... literally what the movie was about.

NEWS

Henry Rollins Cast as the Voice of Tri-Klops in Netflix’s He-Man Reboot

The animated series Masters of the Universe: Revelation will also star Mark Hamill, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Jason Mewes, and more

it's the role rollins was born to play

I don’t think that news even makes the yearly activity summary enclosed with Rollins’ Xmas cards.

Is High Fidelity really so beloved (or its brand name so powerful) that they couldn’t have started from scratch on a series about music obsessives who aren’t exclusively straight white men?

We're literally getting a Karn Evil 9 movie, the answer is "yes".

Another good retrospective review today.

https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/the-klf-chill-out/

I just came here to post that - one of the best things I've read in a long long time!

Yeah, that was a great read, even though I've never been able to crack that particular record.

I love it up until the synths kick in

Not "dumb", but I couldn't disagree with that Elkhorn review more strongly, I think it's a really great record.

The disparity seems stark between the positive tone of the Mhysa review (can’t wait to find a moment to check out this record), and its “6.9” rating(??)

The 0.7 difference btw Elkhorn (negative review) and Mhysa (positive review) doin a lot of work

Yeah that's a bummer for Elkhorn I really like those guys

when will Pitchfork stop trying to make the Men happen

Porridge Radio Make Indie Rock for the Angsty Antisocial in All of Us

they’re a very good band

not too hot 100?

The use of “Alleged” in this headline feels misplaced; it could be read as implying there is some doubt about the claim’s veracity. I would redo the entire headline... make it about her statement (which is lengthy), or public reappearance, not the assault.

That’s literally how news works though

Whiney OTM, this is an odd thing to complain about

The news is her statement; Pitchfork doesn’t have to evaluate whether it’s true or not (or hedge their bets on the question).

This Variety headline doesn’t follow my final suggestion(...); but see how it simply says “Says”. That seems right to me — she’s saying it, that’s what to report. “Alleged” feels like a weasel word, or something a student journalist throws in b/c they think it belongs.

"alleged" is fine. that's what she's doing, alleging.

Both are fine. You can even write "Duffy accuses X of Y." But "alleged" isn't a weasel word.

If you say so. She hasn’t accused anyone, the statement is purposefully vague.

(anyone specific or identified)

This is, without exaggeration, Reporting 101

p4k has journalistic cred to maintain

xp I’m open to being wrong. If she posted that she had been abused as a child (without saying anything more specific), would “Duffy Posts About Alleged Abuse” be appropriate?

If you posted that your car was stolen, and read “Internet Guy Posts About Alleged Car Theft,” you wouldn’t be like — “hey, why call it an ‘allegation’? I was just telling a story about something that happened; why does its veracity have to be challenged in the headline?”

yeah i think an allegation has to have a target

I mean, journalism in general is supposed to have a skeptical stance and seek to confirm with facts and reporting

or it used to, who knows?

I guess whether or not Pitchfork does journalism is the question

Which craft beer goes best w journalism?

They do say in the piece that they reached out to her reps.

Investigating the story may certainly be appropriate; but my point is that reporting on the initial Instagram post is not the place to express skepticism.

"alleged" is absolutely correct. people having conversations aren't bound by journalistic standards & practices, but journalists should emphatically always report an allegation as an allegation.

So you agree that “Duffy Posts About Alleged Child Abuse” would be appropriate if she mentioned that she had been abused?

... YES

I’m open to being wrong

are you

even for this thread this is such a weird argument

Yes, I’m open to being wrong, but nobody has made an argument beyond just saying that I am wrong.

If you report that someone said something (as Variety did), you’re not vouching that it’s true. And if no one specific is being accused of a crime, you’re not crossing any boundaries by simply reporting that someone said that a crime occurred.

I think the “Duffy Opens Up About Alleged Assault” construction might be part of what is throwing morris - it reads as if the allegation was previously a known thing, and Duffy is now speaking more openly about it. Duffy Returns To Public Life, Alleges Horrific Assault might have not had the same confusing effect

even for this thread this is such a weird argument

this though

If you report that someone said something (as Variety did), you’re not vouching that it’s true. And if no one specific is being accused of a crime, you’re not crossing any boundaries by simply reporting that someone said that a crime occurred.

Yes you are. Reporting can be an ass, and I like to tell my student reporters that if they see a red car they don't need three sources to confirm its color. However, when it comes to crime you're dealing with hearsay and he said/she said. A crime occurs when police issue a crime report or confirm a crime was committed.

In morrisp's defense, surely we can at least acknowledge that the word 'alleged' is a loaded one. Obviously it's a semantic issue (and I agree it's correct if we're gonna be all Strunk & White about it), but in casual conversation, if I asked roommate #1 if roommate #2 has done the dishes as per the chore wheel, and she replies "allegedly," I understand that the word is being deployed in this instance to sarcastically cast a certain amount of doubt about whether or not roommate #2 did in fact do the dishes, or whether he had done the dishes in a way that would now allow us to eat off of them, and I might go into the kitchen to see for myself