Advertising Age reports that Pitchfork and The Fader have joined forces, though the degree to which the former is an “exclusive club” is, as always, tediously overstated. (Pitchfork didn’t “consider itself too cool to bother reviewing” Black Kids before setting the hype cycle into overdrive in the first place, let’s not forget.) The two are getting together for “an extensive advertising and sponsorship relationship across print, online, festivals, events and unique content exchanges,” while keeping their advertising and editorial as is.
Though it’s tempting to imagine each mag’s editorial would somehow bleed into one another, I kind of doubt that’ll happen; their styles, while paralleling each other greatly, are too different to really mesh, and besides, both seem to be doing fine without the other. My question, regaring the piece, is: why is Pitchfork “hipper-than-thou” and The Fader—which places a premium on being FIRST! to an even greater degree, particularly given its ink-and-paper flagship, which is costlier than being a Web site first—is not? Could it be that the writer of the piece has heard of the former, since it’s been written about so extensively over the last few years, while The Fader hasn’t been? If so, how—what’s that word again?—ironic.
Indies Pitchfork and Fader Form Partnership [Advertising Age]