punisher Posted January 18 Posted January 18 1 minute ago, conquxror said: so who wants to start a new online music magazine with me to take over pitchfork's fanbase? like, picture this: pitchfork. but instead of incels and nerds, all of the writers are twinks. i was lowkey thinking this the other day, just find people with good topsters on twitter then create a twitter account that rates and reviews albums maybe someone should start an ATRL edition
pisuke Posted January 18 Posted January 18 5 hours ago, EndofASadMovie said: The golden age of music is so over It was over way before 99% of us were even born.
levi_valvi Posted January 18 Posted January 18 I'm devastated I've included so much amazing music in my life thanks to them I didn't always agree, but I often gave albums a 2nd chance if they they acclaimed it or found new artists through their BNM section. 1
playwithme Posted January 18 Posted January 18 Sad. It's the most authoritative voice in the music industry. 1
awesomepossum Posted January 18 Posted January 18 20 hours ago, Gerardo said: Does this mean no more pitchfork reviews at all? Or will they just re-brand and have less staff critics? Will it be GQ critic reviews? ChatGPT reviews
JawBreaker Posted January 18 Posted January 18 19 hours ago, readytowind said: They were horrible swifties. Always handed in overrated points and reviews to her but did terrorize other singers. Such a lame and shallow yellow journalism. They flop now. need to go. 19 hours ago, alexrex said: It makes sense, and Im glad. They became sellouts and annoying, promoting Taylor Swift every single time on Instagram. Yall celebrating this when they were one of the few reviewers that gave Taylor her lowest ratings? Yalls hate for Taylor making yall lose braincells OT: I honestly couldnt care less never once read any of their reviews 1 2
SupremeGoddess Posted January 18 Posted January 18 18 hours ago, Chemist said: Not the publication that gives every mediocre k-pop release a 5/5. Pitchfork fell from grace recenty, but NME has been in the bottom of hell since like the early 00's ok chemist what do you have against asians?
NEX Posted January 18 Posted January 18 The Guardian: Pitchfork’s absorption into GQ is a travesty for music media – and musicians Nice article, but this particular line really surprised me: //one Condé audience development editor tweeted that “by volume, Pitchfork has the highest daily site visitors of any of our titles … despite scant resourcing, esp from corporate.”// https://www.theguardian.com/music/2024/jan/18/pitchforks-absorption-into-gq-is-a-travesty-for-music-media-and-musicians 2
alexrex Posted January 18 Posted January 18 23 hours ago, Digitalism said: People saying that music criticism is dying are hilarious to me. It's true tho. Why do you think the most mediocre artists are on top of the world rn? With all the acclaim and all the noise. 1 1
MatiRod Posted January 18 Posted January 18 Have they said if the site will continue to exist separately, or will it just be under GQ now and the name 'Pitchfork' disappears?
SidetoSpears Posted January 19 Posted January 19 5 hours ago, =NEX= said: The Guardian: Pitchfork’s absorption into GQ is a travesty for music media – and musicians Nice article, but this particular line really surprised me: //one Condé audience development editor tweeted that “by volume, Pitchfork has the highest daily site visitors of any of our titles … despite scant resourcing, esp from corporate.”// https://www.theguardian.com/music/2024/jan/18/pitchforks-absorption-into-gq-is-a-travesty-for-music-media-and-musicians Wait mess if that's true... like more than Vogue? the New Yorker? why couldn't they just keep pitchfork.com running with pop-up ads or something then :( 1
NEX Posted January 19 Posted January 19 11 hours ago, SidetoSpears said: Wait mess if that's true... like more than Vogue? the New Yorker? why couldn't they just keep pitchfork.com running with pop-up ads or something then :( I guess that's what it means, which is shocking. Maybe Pitchfork users are generally the type who use adblockers, so they didn't get much revenue from them?
ATRL Moderator supaspaz Posted January 19 ATRL Moderator Posted January 19 48 minutes ago, =NEX= said: I guess that's what it means, which is shocking. Maybe Pitchfork users are generally the type who use adblockers, so they didn't get much revenue from them? I doubt Condé Nast, which runs luxury brands aimed at upscale middle-aged people, knew how to serve the Pitchfork audience anyway.
ATRL Moderator supaspaz Posted January 19 ATRL Moderator Posted January 19 I’ve got my eye on you now, @xfreshkidxx. Another disappointment siding with the corporate overlords to celebrate the destruction of culture and careers. 1 1
skankle Posted January 19 Posted January 19 Mildly sad but TheSinglesJukebox was the real loss for music journalism over the past few years 2
Rep2000 Posted January 19 Posted January 19 54 minutes ago, =NEX= said: I guess that's what it means, which is shocking. Maybe Pitchfork users are generally the type who use adblockers, so they didn't get much revenue from them? Daily site visitors are not the be all end all of news site anyway. And the site has little to no ads at all to me. Not even subscription plan, donation or hard copy. If even the Guardian is struggling, I don't see how Pfk, which is practically running on its novelty more than revenues for sure, is not.
NEX Posted January 19 Posted January 19 6 minutes ago, Rep2000 said: Daily site visitors are not the be all end all of news site anyway. And the site has little to no ads at all to me. Not even subscription plan, donation or hard copy. If even the Guardian is struggling, I don't see how Pfk, which is practically running on its novelty more than revenues for sure, is not. Ye. They could have done so much more. Subscription plan to view exclusive "Sunday reviews", donations (The Guardian is asking for them on a daily), merchandize (a cute little plushy pitchfork or something). Oh well..
ATRL Moderator supaspaz Posted January 19 ATRL Moderator Posted January 19 22 minutes ago, NewStanner said: All of this because I disliked the post where you called people who don't like Pitchfork "nasty"? Really? It's not that serious, lol, especially not serious enough to insult people over something like this. Personally, I'm glad that they're finally going away. Their reviews were full of bias, lack of professionalism and weird obsession with focusing on the personal lives of artists (instead of writing more about, you know, the actual music). I do feel bad for the (very few) talented writers in their team who lost their jobs however. Hopefully, they'll be able to find it somewhere else again, I really wish them the best. Calling out and threatening people who just simply disagree with your post about some biased music publication... Now that's truly nasty. Also: Pitchfork and culture in the same sentence Maybe culture of bad, click-baiting music journalism. OT: The mask is all the way off!
Slayn Posted January 19 Posted January 19 Wonder how long the site will keep posting reviews/news under the p4k moniker. Very sad.
.thumb.gif.b76ca4d9d1266836992837a38dd37e35.gif)
Recommended Posts