Whatever your opinion of the site, we can all agree that the last thing the Internet/humanity needs is another fussbudget print media type “discovering” that (oh noes) Pitchfork is “snobby” or “snarky” or that its writers* occasionally overreach. So it goes with Advertising Age’s Larry Dobrow, who’s peeved that Pitchfork doesn’t write “about music in a way that makes me want to listen.” Unlike Ultragrrrl. (No, really. He holds up Ultragrrrl’s blog as a positive alternative to Pitchfork. Sure, he also mentions the great Popdose. But c’mon!) It’s hard to say what’s worse, Dobrow’s painfully forced attempts at off-the-cuff snark of his own–”That said, I’d no sooner spend any significant length of time with Pitchfork than with ‘No Jacket Required.’ (Yeah, I just went there.)”…make it stop, mommy!–or his complete failure in this (one paragraph!) examination of the state of Pitchfork’s advertising, a topic you’d think was pretty germane to the readers of the publication that cuts his checks.
Nonetheless, Pitchfork is a lost cause for advertisers. Music labels can’t get anywhere near the site, lest that one of the bands it hypes winds up on the receiving end of one of Pitchfork’s meanie-pants barbs. Gizmo makers aren’t a good fit because the site’s ahead-of-every-curve-ever-always-4-life influentials are already onto the next big thing by the time marketers get around to touting the previous one. Indie-ish movies or books, maybe? I dunno. It’s a little sad, really, that the trickle of Google Ads on Pitchfork’s “Reviews” page is the best the company can do.
Oh really, Lar? You might be right. We’ve certainly noticed lately that a lot of Pitchfork’s ad space seems to be taken up by in-house banners and .gifs. But here’s the thing: there’s a fucking Jagjaguwar ad right in the screencap you’ve used to illustrate your piece. Pretty sure they’re one of those record labels that’s supposed to see Pitchfork as a “lost cause.” And anyone who’s ever opened Pitchfork only to be visually assaulted by a half-naked hipster (whether being sold by Suicide Girls or American Apparel) knows exactly the sort of advertising the site has courted in the past.
But if all those in-house ads are a sign that Pitchfork is suddenly a “lost cause” for advertisers, well, that would have made a somewhat interesting, informative article. (Even if not exactly a newsflash, considering the current bubble-on-the-cusp-of-bursting state of good ol’ Web 2.0.) Unfortunately, it would have required two things: 1.) a little investigative digging and 2.) actually noting a change in the advertising habits of a publication you’re supposed to be covering. Guess the problem is that “the internet allows us to proclaim” opinions so easily and “loudly, taste and common sense be damned,” regardless of how many articles have already proclaimed those opinions into the ground.
Pitchfork Sure Is Cutting Edge, And That’s The Problem [Advertising Age]
* Full disclosure blah blah used to write for Pitchfork blah blah.
“Jagjaguwar’s a label, huh? [chortle] Well, that certainly is a WEIRD name! Thought it was some sort of an energy drink, like the kind my niece drinks! Columbia, now, there was a label [puts on Billy Joel's "52nd Street"]” etc
@NickEddy: “Columbia? Fer-shaw, I say. Don’t need no warbling from a label that sounds too south-o-the-border, know what I say? Now Chess, that’s a name that you can hang yer hat on. Pure class, all the way.”
You can tell he’s an outsider cause he didn’t get the memo that hating on Pitchfork is passe. The new thing is simply to acknowledge pitchfork before moving on to another webzine with weaker design and writers who don’t proofread (Which makes them more “authentic”)
Well, if Jagjaguwar is advertising there then he can’t be right.
Dobrow is definitely a snark merchant, but I actually kind of like him on sports (he writes for Sportsline, usually on baseball). But then again, he mostly seems to know what he’s talking about there. Not so much here.
But all you really need to know is that he works for Maxim and Stuff.
–”That said, I’d no sooner spend any significant length of time with Pitchfork than with ‘No Jacket Required.’ (Yeah, I just went there.)”
You know what this means, right? Phil Collins solo album revival in 2009.
@mike a: That would finally vindicate Brian Raftery’s theory:
[www.empsfm.org]
FWIW, new ads are suddenly live on P4K.
From the piece:
…sternly lecturing the audience as to why Band X is cooler/more worthy of an opening slot on that super-awesome Band of Horses/Cass McCombs double bill than Band Y, and why anyone who only recently happened upon “Neon Bible” (raising hand) is a mainstream poser who totally doesn’t get what Arcade Fire is all about, man.
No, seriously: show me the exact Pitchfork review that uses the phrase “mainstream poser.”
i’ve jsut added “Mr. Rock and Roll and his Grumpy Fire” to my ‘awesome band names if i were ever to start a band’ list
acually, on second thought that would work better as the title of a children’s book….
I don’t know what world this guy lives in where negative things printed about a band are a band thing. Has he never heard the maxim “any publicity is good publicity”? Especially in today’s over-saturated music world, I would think even to get mentioned on the ‘Fork would be a positive for a young band. Labels know that sometimes a publication’s critics aren’t going to like some of the label’s music. If labels pulled all their advertising any little time a publication said something negative about one of their bands, they’d have nowhere left to advertise.
OH NOES YOU MENTIONED A BAND I’VE NEVER HEARD OF AND THEREFORE YOU ARE A SNOB OH NOES
@JZ13:
There’s always Rolling Stone.
However, it is worth talking about their new GoogleAds and Pitchfork branded banners (even if just aesthetically), the decreasing number of ads by indie labels (small and large), and their consistently increasing ad rates. (Where are the “indie” rates, yo?)
I’d love to see their click-thru rates for the indie labels that advertise with them. I can’t imagine that they win the battle against young American Apparel bosoms. With each page’s 6 ads by AA vs. 1 by Jagjaguwar (who doesn’t have an Interactive Development Marketing Team or tight colorful clothing) there’s no way that Okkervil River is winning that competition. Is it really worth it for a label like Jagjaguwar to spend the money?
@SuperUnison: “The new thing is simply to acknowledge pitchfork before moving on to another webzine with weaker design and writers who don’t proofread (Which makes them more “authentic”)”
As if P4k proofreads… I find at least one error in every single piece they publish. I’ve offered them my proofreading services by they’re way too cool for proper grammar and spelling.
Naw, it’s impressions i.e. how many times the ad shows up on one of their pages.
also the bit of writing he quotes about song4mutya is from a “100 best songs” list so saying “dudes i rly liked it, 8.75 out of 10″ is somewhat unnecesary
(full disclosure: i didn’t write it but i know the guy who did)
Hey, ease up on the dude. After all, he did write about music for GuitarJamDaily.com. All he really wants is for Pitchfork to start reviewing Goverment Mule bootlegs.
@Paperboy 2000: I think that Pitchfork’s model is that you actually pay for click-throughs. So the ad is up until a certain number of people click through. That’s how it USED to be, at least.
@mike a: Your search - “mainstream poser” site:pitchforkmedia.com - did not match any documents.
Everybody must make a choice in life: either be a journalist, or use the sentence “I dunno.”
It’s funny, though, while he was insulting Pitchfork I found it emboldened my like for the Indie market. I like the idea that a blog (like this one as well) isn’t being bought by the major labels. And as a result is a pure source of whats independent and atleast respectable, as opposed to what I’m being fed by the big boys…
However I’m still waiting on a review of Indigo-Son’s Nothing New on the Radio. Other blogs (tonedeafcritic for one) have actually scooped both Pitchfork and Idolator (sorry with that one) but the Okayplayer post will probably go up next week.
For all the complaints its still a better way of finding about the next “big thing” than going to SPIN
haha
If this article has one redeeming quality it’s that it calls out the painful puns that make their way into so much of the site’s news copy.
“…releasing an EP of covers … called Music and Lyrics (alas, no Hugh Grant guest spot).”
“R.E.M. are all set to put the rapid back in rapid eye movement with Accelerate”
“The Long Blonds Extend Tour: Longer? For sure. Blonder? Eh, not particularly.”
“To celebrate his 75th birthday on April 30, country legend Willie Nelson is piling on the presents…[wait for it, wait for it]for us[!!!]“