letter16no
Struttin' Now
i reject your reality & substitute my own!
Posts: 340
|
Post by letter16no on Nov 23, 2007 5:16:23 GMT
Pitchfork is terrible. There's an interview from We Are Scientists and Keith was talking about how they got a bad review, mostly because they're not on an indie label (they're on Virgin). So Keith said, "I bet our review of Love & Squalor would have been better if we were on an indie label." So as much as we're biased about our boys in KOL, Pitchfork basically will tear you a new one if you're not signed to an unknown label.
They're just plain mean with nothing better to do than be rich kid hipsters. In fact, there was a reviewer who worked there who was ready to "expose their failings." This is in regard to The Editors' latest album...before it even came out Which, by the way, they gave 4.9/10. What!? Don't ever go to that site. Trust me, they'll just crush your soul so they can sound cool.
|
|
|
|
Post by double on Nov 29, 2007 22:42:51 GMT
i LOATHE pitchfork media. i can't even begin to describe. they're such fucking pathetic, pretentious, cliche, indie "wannabe" journalist kids who probably write for pitchfork media because their rejection letters from rolling stone made them bitter and cold.
i've yet to see such arrogant jackasses in my entire life, and i've fucking read anne coulture books.
and here's the thing, normally i wouldn't care if a magazine is all of those things. i find i'm too apathetic to let something so silly effect my mood enough to inspire me to actually muster up the energy it requires to hate it. but they take the cake. why? because they aren't fucking about the music.
they don't even GIVE music a chance. once they dislike a band, they write off everything they do. and if they consider a band "indie" enough, they'll fucking eat out of their hands for 54564 records. that site is more a place for sad little assholes who were probably neglected as children to write up witty insults than it is a music magazine.
ok. i'm done.
|
|
|
|
Post by lauralimonada on Nov 30, 2007 1:59:28 GMT
i've yet to see such arrogant jackasses in my entire life, and i've fucking read anne coulture books. wow. how could you put yourself through the torture that is anne coulture? |
|
|
|
Post by double on Nov 30, 2007 5:01:55 GMT
i've yet to see such arrogant jackasses in my entire life, and i've fucking read anne coulture books. wow. how could you put yourself through the torture that is anne coulture? lol. i was preparing for a debate and i needed to understand her reasoning so i could counter with you know, LOGIC. doubt she's ever heard of such a thing though. she's like...the arrogant, rich, moronic, high school cheerleader of politics. |
|
|
|
Post by chichi on Nov 30, 2007 15:08:18 GMT
i LOATHE pitchfork media. i can't even begin to describe. they're such fucking pathetic, pretentious, cliche, indie "wannabe" journalist kids who probably write for pitchfork media because their rejection letters from rolling stone made them bitter and cold. i've yet to see such arrogant jackasses in my entire life, and i've fucking read anne coulture books. and here's the thing, normally i wouldn't care if a magazine is all of those things. i find i'm too apathetic to let something so silly effect my mood enough to inspire me to actually muster up the energy it requires to hate it. but they take the cake. why? because they aren't fucking about the music. they don't even GIVE music a chance. once they dislike a band, they write off everything they do. and if they consider a band "indie" enough, they'll fucking eat out of their hands for 54564 records. that site is more a place for sad little assholes who were probably neglected as children to write up witty insults than it is a music magazine. ok. i'm done. So what do you really think of Pitchfork?  |
|
