Site New Answers Search Boards ILE ILM Answers New Question New Questions New Poll Blog View Register Login

Is it a conflict of interest, or simply a dick move when a music magazine such as Pitchfork throws a show and does a four part series on how fucking awesome it was?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
It's certainly kind of a dick move to brag about your own show so much, but is there a conflict of interest when a site that's primarily music criticism invites a bunch of the bands it regularly reviews to play at it's festival and then gives them huge, fawning reviews for their performances? At what point do they cross over from journalists to fanboy (and not in a good way)?

― Von Doom, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:45 (twenty years ago)

It's a website.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:48 (twenty years ago)

there goes that famous pitchfork journalistic integrity!

― Dr. Glen Y. Abreu (dr g), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:48 (twenty years ago)

So what you're saying is, Pitchfork are teh douche.

xpost

― geyser muffler and a quarter (Dave225), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:49 (twenty years ago)

"conflict of interest"

you are fucking laughable, man.

― cutty (mcutt), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:50 (twenty years ago)

The moment I read the word "rapstress" I knew it was all over for the world's #1 music site.

― Rob Uptight (Rob Uptight), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:50 (twenty years ago)

You know how if you had this awesome party and some of your good friends couldn't make it, you might send them pictures of it, and maybe say a little about how much fun it was and how there was this huge guy in a red mesh tank top hanging out the whole time?

This is kind of like that.

― nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:50 (twenty years ago)

Nabisco OTM. Also, Amy Phillips did say that the Jean Grae/Will Oldham DJ set was fun but also sloppy and crowd-alienating.

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:53 (twenty years ago)

They're definitely doing a better job of making their festival sound fun than anyone else is.

― miccio (miccio), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:53 (twenty years ago)

And that's not a complaint. I like fun!

― miccio (miccio), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:54 (twenty years ago)

If Pitchfork held a secret show and gave it no publicity some dick would be on here whining about elitism.

― Anti-Pope Consortium (noodle vague), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:57 (twenty years ago)

This picture of MIA with Mike Love is nice though:

http://pitchforkmedia.com/features/live/festivals/intonation05/willoldhamjeangrae-big.jpg

― Dr. Glen Y. Abreu (dr g), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:57 (twenty years ago)

Kelefa beat them to the punch of grading everybody there.

― Boring Satanic Space Jazz (sexyDancer), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:57 (twenty years ago)

At what point do they cross over from journalists to fanboy (and not in a good way)?

well, record and live reviews aren't objective journalism, a weighing of the facts, etc., and our writing has been blasted for years as over-emoting fanboy stuff (most recently by K in his Intonation review!), so...is this a new complaint?

― scott pl. (scott pl.), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:58 (twenty years ago)

DICK MOVES

― cutty (mcutt), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:59 (twenty years ago)

Kelefa beat them to the punch of grading everybody there.

At the risk of being pedantic (aka dick-moving), K.S. really only recited Pitchfork's scores and then gave an overall score of his own, 7.3. Still plenty of room to review the individual bands' performances!

― marc h. (marc h.), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:01 (twenty years ago)

'Nick's Dick Moves' should've been the name of the Voice blog!

― miccio (miccio), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:01 (twenty years ago)

to be a bit more serious, if it sucked we'd either have shut our yaps or said so; so far, the major complaints about the music have been from Kelefa and DeRo. I haven't seen any complaints about the organization per se.

Plus, we picked the bands because, y'know, we like them both on record and in a live setting - the conflict of interest ? would have been more apt if we had chosen Band A cuz they would draw fans even though we disliked them and then praised their inclusion. Or, feel free, to whine if you think we're gonna start giving out free passes to these guys cuz they played our festival that one time.

Are we dicks? I dunno, maybe.

― scott pl. (scott pl.), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:07 (twenty years ago)

xxpost: oops, you're right. Sometimes it's better just to hold that dick still a while and let everything move around it.

― Boring Satanic Space Jazz (sexyDancer), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:09 (twenty years ago)

oh, no, you're DEFINITELY a dick.
xpost

― Ian John50n (orion), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:10 (twenty years ago)

Fluxblog actually did grade the performances in his review.

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:10 (twenty years ago)

wait wait wait;
so.. FLUXBLOG is a PERSON?

― Ian John50n (orion), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:11 (twenty years ago)

Results 1 - 10 of about 103,000 for "pitchfork" dick. (0.23 seconds)

― marc h. (marc h.), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:15 (twenty years ago)

What if ILM held a concert and nobody came?

― Rumpusroom, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:16 (twenty years ago)

I am waiting for FluxFest 2008.

― Dr. Glen Y. Abreu (dr g), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:16 (twenty years ago)

JOYCORE ONLY

― hstencil (hstencil), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:18 (twenty years ago)

Scott: Jesus Christ man...the complaints by DeRo and Kelefa were so freaking benign that, for you to get wound up by them is just insane.

As for them reviewing themselves, I think the notion is awfully pathetic, but I haven't read it, so perhaps the tone of the writing redeems it. If they give an account of their enjoyment and are honest in their assessments, perhaps the incestuous idea is levelled. If its just rampant raves and gleeful "We Did It!"s, then its bullshit.

― Brett Hickman (Bhickman), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:18 (twenty years ago)

You guys take "music journalist" thing too seriously.

― Dr. Glen Y. Abreu (dr g), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:20 (twenty years ago)

i think as fun and successful as Intonation was, the 'Forkers deserve a little time to pat themselves on the back. i've never had such a good time at a two-day festival, for as cheaply and as problem-free, as i did this past weekend. let 'em celebrate.

― jonviachicago, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:21 (twenty years ago)

If there's one thing that music web sites (and blogs, etc) have proven is that basic journalism is thrown out the window for grandiose and/or insane ranting/raving.

― Brett Hickman (Bhickman), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:21 (twenty years ago)

I think liking the Broken Social Scene might count as a pussy move.

― Boring Satanic Space Jazz (sexyDancer), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:22 (twenty years ago)

Then, is beating up the Broken Social Scene a dick move?

― Dr. Glen Y. Abreu (dr g), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:26 (twenty years ago)

IT IS AGAINST THE LAWS OF GOOD TASTE TO DISCUSS YOUR OWN ACCOMPLISHMENTS

MY JOURNALIST OF CHOICE CAN BEAT UP YOUR JOURNALIST OF CHOICE

'DICK' IS AN INSULT RESERVED FOR ONLY THE MOST HEINOUS OF OFFENDERS

THAT IS ALL

― BURRITO, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:27 (twenty years ago)

cops, not private dicks

― hstencil (hstencil), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:28 (twenty years ago)

xpost: beating up the Broken Social Scene is THE LAW

― Boring Satanic Space Jazz (sexyDancer), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:28 (twenty years ago)

Where was Scott "getting wound up" by Kelefa and DeRo? He just pointed out that they're the two most prominent critics who have taken the music to task. Objective statement.

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:30 (twenty years ago)

Its in his defensive statement below that line.

My only point is this: They run their site the way they see fit and they get a shitload of people hitting their site every day. He has absolutely NO reason to bother trying to win over anyone at this point. He also should not feel as if he needs to defend the site either. I can only think of one exception where a defense would be worth the effort and that would be if the site was accused of some serious crime/mistake/what have you and then, maybe it should be addressed on a message board. But I don't understand defending a site that draws people in like moths to a flame regardless of what it does or says. Pitchfork needs no defending, that's what makes it what it is. Its ballsy, immature, intelligent and incredibly irritating and its what got them where they are now and there should not be any need for a defense.

― Brett Hickman (Bhickman), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:35 (twenty years ago)

Scott: Jesus Christ man...the complaints by DeRo and Kelefa were so freaking benign that, for you to get wound up by them is just insane.

uh, I'm not wound up at all just sorta indicating that, along with a bunch of pfm writers who were predisposed to like the bands they selected, most more objective viewers also had a good time. Hell, the Chicagoist wrapup is more "fawning" than ours.

― scott pl. (scott pl.), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:36 (twenty years ago)

Geezo: I can't imagine why "we did it" would be such an offensive response. Anyway, half the site's staff was at this thing, with cameras handy and the bands right there to chat with -- it'd have been weird not to cover it, or at least post a selection of photos.

It's been interesting to see how everyone covers the acts, what with our all being there watching them. Some of them have said evaluative good/bad stuff about the sets; others have talked more about the bands themselves; others have been more about how each band fit into the story of the weekend. Sylvester's, for instance, did a good job of describing why I went off to grab drinks during the DFA79 set.

― nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:37 (twenty years ago)

Its in his defensive statement below that line.

yeah, that's directed to the guy who started the thread.

― scott pl. (scott pl.), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:38 (twenty years ago)

ballsy

I am never going to wear my "ballsy" t-shirt again.

― Rob Uptight (Rob Uptight), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:41 (twenty years ago)

(xpost) And has nothing to do with Sanneh and DeRogatis.

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:41 (twenty years ago)

starting this thread was simply a dick move.

― cutty (mcutt), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:41 (twenty years ago)

No way!

Speaking positively about yourself and your accomplishments = dick move

Speaking negatively about others and their accomplishments = the right thing to do

― Dr. Glen Y. Abreu (dr g), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:42 (twenty years ago)

http://www.sandiegohistory.org/timeline/images/seedickrun.jpg

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:43 (twenty years ago)

this thread is sadly lacking in bukkake

― Boring Satanic Space Jazz (sexyDancer), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:45 (twenty years ago)

My only point is this: They run their site the way they see fit and they get a shitload of people hitting their site every day. He has absolutely NO reason to bother trying to win over anyone at this point.

Why in the world would we not want to expand our readership?

― scott pl. (scott pl.), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:46 (twenty years ago)

jesus fucking christ can we ban all "pitchfork is eeeeeeeeeevil" threads in the future please? They put on a festival. They liked the festival. They wrote about how much/why they liked the festival. HEAVENS NO! THIS IS A GREAT INSULT TO THE PROUD AND HONORABLE TRADITION OF MUSIC JOURNALISM!

Fine, anytime the 'fork covers itself in the future all writers, editors, and webdesigners associated with the piece should be forced to ritualistically consumer bottles of Romilar first - does that sound like an acceptable solution?

― Zack Richardson (teenagequiet), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:46 (twenty years ago)

relax, we are already into the joke portion of this thread.

― cutty (mcutt), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:48 (twenty years ago)

OMG Dr. G is totally my new president.

― nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:51 (twenty years ago)

MAKING OUT WITH ULTRAGRRRRL

― OLD SPICE® CHEMTRAILS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (ex machina), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:51 (twenty years ago)

Scott, if you really think going on a message board to defend the site is going to win over any substantial amount of people then there is nothing more I could ever bother to say on the subject to you. I feel that what Pitchfork does is enough to keep people coming back and in turn, telling others about the site.

― Brett Hickman (Bhickman), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:51 (twenty years ago)

I have a feeling that there is more you will say.

― Dr. Glen Y. Abreu (dr g), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:53 (twenty years ago)

I'll say more, but I will not offer Scott any of my (probably worthless but still sage) advice.

― Brett Hickman (Bhickman), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:54 (twenty years ago)

xxxxpost - you're right, i shoulda saved the vitriol for the next anti-pitchfork screed, which is currently scheduled to be posted July 22nd, 2005 at 11:32 a.m. EST.

― Zack Richardson (teenagequiet), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:55 (twenty years ago)

Glen, that picture really needs to go on the Mike Love + Weirdos thread

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:56 (twenty years ago)

Is there a Mike Love + Usher's Sister thread?

― Dr. Glen Y. Abreu (dr g), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:57 (twenty years ago)

my dad just really obviously went to have sex with his girlfriend in the other room.

― Fetchboy (Felcher), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:58 (twenty years ago)

If he brags about it, show him this thread.

― Dr. Glen Y. Abreu (dr g), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 19:59 (twenty years ago)

Uh, doesn't this week's Village Voice have a two-page photo spread on how fucking awesome Siren was?

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:03 (twenty years ago)

Do the photos have text about how awesome the show was?

― Brett Hickman (Bhickman), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:05 (twenty years ago)

xxxxpost - you're right, i shoulda saved the vitriol for the next anti-pitchfork screed, which is currently scheduled to be posted July 22nd, 2005 at 11:32 a.m. EST.

thanks for the birthday gift, zack.

― maria tessa sciarrino (theoreticalgirl), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:06 (twenty years ago)

Do the photos have text about how awesome the show was?

No, but printed page space is finite, as opposed to web space; the inclusion of a special section in itself indicates how fucking awesome it was.

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:11 (twenty years ago)

I just read the review and it barely focused on the actual music of the show. It was so all over the place and pointless that I was shocked to find that neither Richard Christgau nor Nick Sylvester had written it.

― Brett Hickman (Bhickman), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:13 (twenty years ago)

richard who?

― strng hlkngtn, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:18 (twenty years ago)

Shit: Robert

― Brett Hickman (Bhickman), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:19 (twenty years ago)

It's, um, pretty standard for institutions/businesses to post "here's what you missed" type after-photos and articles after they put on events.. whether it's a mostly-independent music review website, or an annual picnic for a real estate company.

Some people genuinely want to see what it was like. If they're suspicious about the site not being objective about it, then there are plenty of outlets to hear alternative viewpoints. To expect a site to just keep mum about what it just accomplished is just plain nuts.

Granted, I haven't read the article series. If they're saying stuff like "We are the most fucking AWESOME festival throwers on the planet, and anybody else who has claimed greater is OBVIOUSLY deluded.", then that's a different issue...

Otherwise, I think it's a case where X hates Y, Y just did something it's proud of, and X just wants to be a skunk.

― donut ferry (donut), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:31 (twenty years ago)

I think the only way to do something like this is to post accounts of personal experiences from staffers. It can't have the appearance of an actual review.

― Brett Hickman (Bhickman), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:33 (twenty years ago)

Scott, if you really think going on a message board to defend the site is going to win over any substantial amount of people...

Ah, Brett, my understanding is that Scott has been posting on ILM far longer than he has been editing/writing for Pitchfork. So, uh, why not go on a music-lovin' message board to say stuff about, y'know, said stuff?

He's the nice guy. It's staff members like me who are dicks.

― marc h. (marc h.), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:42 (twenty years ago)

scott has been posting to ilm since year one. there are relatively few people around at this point who can say that.

― strng hlkngtn, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:44 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, I didn't want to play the "I know Scott" card, but the way you characterize him on here is so off-mark it's ridiculous.

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:45 (twenty years ago)

(To Brett, obv.)

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:46 (twenty years ago)

I think the only way to do something like this is to post accounts of personal experiences from staffers. It can't have the appearance of an actual review.

?! What's the difference?

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:47 (twenty years ago)

Hickman, have you ever said anything on ILM that wasn't totally and completely wrong?
-- n/a (nu...), July 20th, 2005 10:13 AM. (Nick A.) (later)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If so, please link so I can boggle in amazement.
-- n/a (nu...), July 20th, 2005 10:14 AM. (Nick A.) (later)

― n/a (Nick A.), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:48 (twenty years ago)

Ya know, I actually like Scott. The point I was trying to make is missed.

― Brett Hickman (Bhickman), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 20:59 (twenty years ago)

Brett, the only point you seem to be making (in this, or any post of yours to most Fork threads) is I BE SO JEALOUS AND HAVE HATEFUCK WOOD FOR PITCHFORK or something. And, y'know, your worth in the eyes of folks here would probably skyrocket if you actually posted something like "I have hatefuck wood for Pitchfork" instead of this unsubstantiated illogical nonsense you're trying to pass off as, um, whatever.

― David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 21:16 (twenty years ago)

Pitchfork- ain't no telling when they're down for a dick move.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 21:44 (twenty years ago)

TS: dick moves vs. hatefuck wood

― miccio (miccio), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 21:45 (twenty years ago)

dave have i told you lately that i love you.

― strng hlkngtn, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 21:46 (twenty years ago)

Brett, if you really think going on a message board and making an ass out of yourself is going to win over any substantial amount of people to Static Multimedia. . .

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 21:56 (twenty years ago)

The show was organized extremely well, the music went off/over very well. It all made me proud to live in Chicago. I hope they do it again.

What's to complain about? Let them post as many photos and recaps as they want.

― Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 23:04 (twenty years ago)

haha, static gets clowned. !!!

― breezy, Thursday, 21 July 2005 01:09 (twenty years ago)

If you actually read what I wrote, you'll see I was defending Pitchfork. I even said that Scott shouldn't feel it necessary to defend the site against detractors. I admire what that site has done. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't jealous, though. Fuck yeah I'd love to have the Fork's stats.

Over and done.

― Brett Hickman (Bhickman), Thursday, 21 July 2005 02:25 (twenty years ago)

At what point do they cross over from journalists to fanboy (and not in a good way)?

It is impossible to cross over from journalism to fanboyishness in a bad way.

― Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Thursday, 21 July 2005 02:39 (twenty years ago)

its a free website. who gives a shit what the post or don't post?

― chris andrews (fraew), Thursday, 21 July 2005 02:45 (twenty years ago)

conflicts of interest ranked by how conflicted or interesting they are:

1. the new york times's (or boston globe's) daily reporting on the boston red sox.

3. all those "news" stories about the goings-on on "survivor" or "american idol" on your local cbs or abc affiliate.

6. entertainment weekly's reviews of time warner products.

8. everything the source has ever done.

17. mtv's production of any show or news story about anything made by viacom.

42. rolling stone magazine/rock and roll hall of fame.

296. village voice/siren fest.

296(tie). picthfork/intonation

― fact checking cuz (fcc), Thursday, 21 July 2005 12:10 (twenty years ago)

the source had integrity in the beginning no? In Jeff Chang's book there's a whole chapter about the fights between the two founders and how Benzino came in and caused trouble and the entire editorial staff walked...

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Thursday, 21 July 2005 13:25 (twenty years ago)

good point. amend #8 above to:

"everything the source has done for the past several years."

― fact checking cuz (fcc), Thursday, 21 July 2005 14:01 (twenty years ago)

or i could just make that: "everything benzino has ever done."

― fact checking cuz (fcc), Thursday, 21 July 2005 14:02 (twenty years ago)

At least Brett and Herr Doom aren't alone:

http://peripateticlife.blogspot.com/2005/07/pitchfork-medias-intonation-festival.html

Any suggestion that Pitchfork's integrity is too high is just as ludicrous as when investment advisors say they have too much integrity to give high ratings to the equities of a company for whom they also provide consulting services.

Haha, yes! People who write about obscure music for peanuts and then share it with the world in concert are EXACTLY like people playing with your retirement money.

― marc h. (marc h.), Thursday, 21 July 2005 18:52 (twenty years ago)

I like how everyone seems to have forgotten that the financial and logistical backbone of the festival was not Pitchfork's - that they only curated the bill and don't stand to profit from it aside from the publicity!

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Thursday, 21 July 2005 18:57 (twenty years ago)

Rich Sylvester is the worst blog ever.

― Beta (abeta), Thursday, 21 July 2005 19:44 (twenty years ago)

they wrote about their festival cause no one else will cause pfm is beating the crap out of every other music magazine/website except for a few (dusted, stylus &c.)

you think spin will write about intonation? just more dropped subscriptions innit?

― david day (winslow), Thursday, 21 July 2005 20:54 (twenty years ago)

I'm just glad I went to What The Heck Fest instead.

― Kevin Erickson, Thursday, 21 July 2005 21:02 (twenty years ago)

this is an intriguing topic and discussion

― the world at large, Thursday, 21 July 2005 21:34 (twenty years ago)

Oh man I saw that Bowling for Soup dude in the red mesh tank top.

― Roque Strew (RoqueStrew), Friday, 22 July 2005 08:10 (twenty years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.
Site New Answers Search Boards ILE ILM Answers New Question New Questions New Poll Blog View Register Login