Comments on: Critics on notice

By: matt

matt — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:53:23 +0000

of course reviews influence opinions. why print criticism if that’s not the case? but it’s rarely on the direct or large scale you might expect. for example, restaurant reviewers regularly complain that the places they’re giving chef hats are under-subscribed, while panned eateries get several sittings a night. same with the music industry, theatre, and so on. the influence is more subtle, i guess. it’s somewhere in the cultural capital of the object.

reviewers can definitely be wrong, and there are plenty that make me throw my hands up in the air in disgust every week, but that’s part of (like journalism more broadly) being the first draft of history. reviewers are accountable for what they write, under media and defamation law, but a cowering spineless media is a long way from what you want, i imagine. telling it as you see it is a key pillar in democracy, which may seem like a long bow to draw from writing record reviews, but it’s all part of the same system of journalism, and there are plenty of working journalists who start/ed out in music writing. as andrew mueller (The Face, The Guardian, etc) said when i spoke to him a few weeks ago, dealing with over-sensitive rockers carrying guitars (and hip hop heads with mics) isn’t that different from resistance fighters bearing kalashnikovs.

By: scot

scot — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 22:19:04 +0000

The reason I persisted in buying the NME for many years was primarily the laugh-factor of their “0″ rated reviews. The idea that you can’t offer YOUR OPINION about something is just insane. But you can report OTHER PEOPLE’S opinions just fine;

“some people say this record is the worst in history, personally I wouldn’t go that far but others have opined that listening to this release will cause erectile dysfunction in 18 year old males and make a female listener’s arse look big in jeans”.

can’t blame me, that’s just someone’s opinion honestly reported. ;=)

By: cearta.ie » Blog Archive » Unpalatable - defamatory restaurant reviews

cearta.ie » Blog Archive » Unpalatable - defamatory restaurant reviews — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 11:17:02 +0000

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 07:00:32 +0000

I agree Eliza… reviews influence opinions and can alter the outcome somewhat. The extent of the review’s effect is almost impossible to measure and therefore either side of the equation probably has an argument to make/justify.

Reviewers write from their own perspective and therefore are eternally justified under the clause that is otherwise known as an opinion (and therefore never wrong..ha!)

Reviewers should be accountable for what they write though, and be able to back it up if in the rare occurence that (real) controversy arises.

Most artists are overly sensitive about their work, but then again, most will generally get over bad reviews. If the reviewer is consistent then they’ll be respected. Items for consumption need reviews and reviewers need them..

By: Eliza

Eliza — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 02:32:00 +0000

I think if you look at the legislation a negative review is defamatory. Kind of ridiculous, huh?

Matt – I disagree with you. I think music reviews completely have that sway still. Think about Pitchfork – a lot of bands are literally made from that site? I guess not so much on a local level, but still. We live in a completely bizarre world.

By: Peter Hollo

Peter Hollo — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 23:10:46 +0000

This is so insane. What were the High Court thinking?

Even if the only precedent was for those writing bad Coco Rosie reviews, we’d be in trouble! (haha)