pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

an America that went through the trouble of keeping Black disco-tinged acts off the air.

Would like to learn more about this. I thought it was all MTV’s fault.

Not dumb at all: todays great Busta Rhymes review.

I've been nurturing a Busta Rhymes obsession for a month or two; it's kinda horrifying to me that he's not routinely discussed as one of the greatest rappers ever.

Six years since her last studio album, the veteran singer-songwriter and slide guitarist with a collection of robust professional rock that may inspire deep dives into her back catalog.

I'm just struggling to know if this is a sentence.

maybe missing the word "returns" before "with"?

It could be a sentence... if she is doing the diving and her collection of rock may inspire deep

alpine static is correct, otherwise that is a bad sentence

It's fixed btw.

hey, I've no control over subheads

https://pitchfork.com/news/t-bone-burnett-reveals-new-analog-reproduction-technology/

This article gets the name of its subject ("Ionic Originals") wrong four times ("Iconic Originals").

https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/kirk-hammett-portals/

Back then, Metallica found itself at a crossroads, struggling with interband tension...

Pretty sure that should be intra, not inter.

They were feuding with Barenaked Ladies.

Help me understand the point of this reporting: https://pitchfork.com/news/beyonce-2022-oscars-performance-was-taped-a-week-before-airing/

Through a Freedom of Information Act request filed with the City of Compton

??

“Pitchfork has contacted Beyoncé’s representatives for comment.”

Comment on what?

Right??

It has the air of "we're really onto something here!" about it, but I can't imagine anyone caring.

It feels like something because it has great clickbait keywords. People are probably already using it on Twitter to harvest engagement.

The news item didn't get into this, but it relates to an existing controversy about this year's Oscars telecast, regarding award presentations that were pre-recorded but inserted into the show as though they were live. So it's noteworthy that that happened not just with awards presentations but with a musical performance, too.

People who care about the Oscars care.

If it was previously acknowledged that the performance had been pre-taped, why does the timeframe matter?

It feels like a total college newspaper piece

with offsite performances like that unless the performer is holding up a copy of that days newspaper i assume its not live, i'm surprised anyone would be surprised by that

pitchfork will have to wait -- i have my own question in with their representatives and am eagerly awaiting their reply

In a community survey conducted by the production crew, only two neighborhood respondents indicated any reservations about the shoot. One person expressed concern about “neighborhood safety because it depends on who’s in it,” while the other requested unspecified “inconvenience compensation.”

what's THIS about!?

The outlet cited three unnamed sources who said that talks about the shoot had “solidified” on March 14, when the permit had, in fact, been approved four days prior to that.

Getting a bit Pepe Silvia at this point.

Don't worry, I will cover all of this in my 10min+ react youtube video, you can find it through the link in my twitter post about the article with the caption "excuse me??". Anyway, by the end of the video I will have thoroughly reacted with concerned puzzlement and suspicion concluding that I'll be "looking for answers" and will declare conclusively "I don't know about that". I'll share the article/vid on reddit with headline "Beyonce Ignores Obvious Safety Issues And Refuses Compensation To Residents During Shoot For Fake Oscar Performance" to multiple subreddits like whatcouldgowrong and winstupidprizes

Huh?

please like and share

and don't forget to subscribe below

i'm laughing at the implication here — which is that there are still people who believe that everything on television is totally real and exactly as it appears guys i swear look at it!

do you think pfork staffers also check the other side of the mirror to see if all that stuff is really there too?

stereogum or somebody should start some beef with their own headline: "pfork fails to understand basic show business operations, harasses beyonce"

Good review of the Throwing Muses debut, coincidentally among the best albums ever:

https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/throwing-muses-throwing-muses/

Agreed and agreed!

One of the best in months.

Minor point of order: The In a Doghouse bundle is available on Spotify pretty much everywhere apart from the US and Canada.

I know it’s ridiculous to complain about Pitchfork in 2022 and it has been slowly developing into a wider net “culture” site for some time now, but that “here’s what the stars wore at the Met Gala” photo essay was really striking in a, “do not want” kind of way. I guess whatever gets clicks, but that felt out of step even with their current incarnation. Figure we’re about a season away from “Phoebe Bridgers are lunch at THIS east village hot spot” paparazzi shots.

this is gonna sound really crazy but you can just ignore the one little box on the website w/ the met gala photos and keep scrolling

there's been a two page spread in rolling stone featuring literal paparazzi pics of rock stars going on like 3+ decades now, it will be ok

cool condescending post, just saying that it seemed particularly out of place for Pitchfork no matter what other outlets might have already been doing it.

I know it’s ridiculous to complain about Pitchfork in 2022 and it has been slowly developing into a wider net “culture” site for some time now, but that “here’s what the stars wore at the Met Gala” photo essay was really striking in a, “do not want” kind of way. I guess whatever gets clicks, but that felt out of step even with their current incarnation. Figure we’re about a season away from “Phoebe Bridgers are lunch at THIS east village hot spot” paparazzi shots.

lol autocorrect, but indie rock cannibalism would def get more clicks

come on, Rolling Stone has been publishing recipes for how to cook & eat celebs for decades, get over it

If it was previously acknowledged that the performance had been pre-taped, why does the timeframe matter?

It feels like a total college newspaper piece

― Hops: Mosaic, Citra, Simcoe (morrisp), Friday, April 29, 2022 9:52 AM (four days ago) bookmarkflaglink

*Had* it been previously acknowledged that the performance was pre-taped? Maybe it had, but that was the first I'd heard of it. When I was watching it, I assumed it was live and even thought "Oh, this performance is starting the show so they can take advantage of the daylight."

It said that in the article.

Sometime Pitchfork contributor Larry Fitzmaurice in his email newsletter says : Panda Bear's Person Pitch, one of the most influential albums in any genre from the last 25 years

Hmm.

I like Larry, but anything you find after subscribing to any music writer's Substack newsletter is ultimately no one's problem but your own

An intriguing vision of some records you may have missed later this year that were actually released last year

https://pitchfork.com/features/lists-and-guides/great-records-you-may-have-missed-winter-2022/

actually one for a pedants thread probably

those roundups are usually good

one of the few things I read on p4k

yeah they're fine, should have had the subeditors do a proper check though!

for what exactly?

"Records you may have missed" for winter 2022?

I just woke up so maybe I'm being super dense, but is this not a list of records released in the winter (Jan, Feb, March, April) of 2022? "Winter term" just ended a few days ago at my university, for example