File: 103 KB, 418x455, 1am Topic.png [
Show reposts] Image reverse search: [
iqdb] [
google]
No.40995819 [
Reply] [
Original]
Fellow Pitchfork patricians, it is once again the time for our nightly countdown for Pitchfork's 5 new reviews to be updated on the site at 1am eastern time.
10.0?
0.0?
Best New Music?
Best New Reissue?
8.0+ with no BNM?
A shitty set of 7's and below?
Noctourinquet Review?
Ryan "THE TASTEMAKER" Dombal?
Ian FUCKIN' Cohen?
Jayson "8.7" Greene?
qt Lindsay Zoladz?
qt Kim "Meal Goddess" Kelly?
Grayson "Grizzly" Currin?
Brian "Backup" Howe?
Will someone dethrone's Yeezus' 9.5 for AOTY?
The most wonderful time of every night, right now. Here it is, the nightly P4K thread. Time to get comfy.
>P4K Collection Rar (Over 300 deleted reviews, pics of every staff member, etc.)
https://mega.co.nz/#!XMRE1DxS!TLIOznAZL9p54Cdd6BsaiQb-V7RMHMBfGzjmuO0jjJQ
| >> | No.40997206
http://no-trivia.tumblr.com/post/64660558089/wondering-what-happens-behind-the-scenes-at-p4k-i-knew
In general, a record is discussed by the writers and generally, through that, the site arrives at a score consensus. Then reviews are assigned or fit to a writer (usually that writer has sent a pitch). So, in a sense yeah, the reviews are controlled by the editors because they assign someone whose opinion on the record (especially if it is a notable or relevant record) fits the view of the site.
A certain buzzing artist was not well-recieved by most of the writers whose opinions on the given genre that this artist operates in are usually valued. One of the people in charge of P4K was pushing hard for the artist and for the most part, the writers who care passionately about this type of music were just like, “I don’t know, man, the album’s all right, but that’s it.”
Finally, the review of this record came out and the artist got a ‘Best New Music.’
And I noticed it was written by a writer new to the site. It felt a little weird for a number of reasons.
1. Why are you asking for the opinions of the writers if you’re ultimately going to blow them off?
2. This particular artist was very buzz worthy and SEO-friendly.
3. I don’t know anything about this, so this part is pure speculation, but it seemed creepy to assign it to a new writer who you know, is going to be easier to persuade because hey, they want to keep writing for the site they just started writing for, you know?
|
| >> | No.40997225
>>40997206
It's ASAP Rocky. I wasn't even thinking it would be a rap artist or someone so obvious.
"A certain buzzing artist was not well-recieved by most of the writers whose opinions on the given genre that this artist operates in are usually valued. One of the people in charge of P4K was pushing hard for the artist and, for the most part, the writers who care passionately about this type of music were just like, 'I don’t know, man, the album’s all right, but that’s it.' Finally, the review of this record came out and the artist got a ‘Best New Music.’ And I noticed it was written by a writer new to the site."
1. It happened in 2011. ASAP was heavy on blog rotation in 2011. The block of quoted text is written to imply it's a debut (hint: "buzzing").
2. He was awarded a BNM tag, and, although being released towards the end of the year, Rocky didn't appear on their Top 50 Albums list, not even towards the bottom. Meaning the main staff who make these lists based on consensus/tally didn't place him on their lists.
3. The review was written by Jeff Weiss whose first published review for Pitchfork was two days prior. LiveLoveASAP was only his second review, the anomaly; they typically don't assign releases from hyped artists to new employees.
|