Quantcast Carolinian
College Media Network

Gathering Wool: The pitchfork problem

Ryan Hecht

Issue date: 4/1/08 Section: Life
  • Print
  • Email
Everyday I check the usual online subjects of Facebook and email. I doodle around on ESPN.com and now nytimes.com after UNCG teased us with free newspapers for a month. The one other website I check frequently is much more controversial than it should be. That would be Pitchforkmedia.com, the so-called "hub for indie kids." To those prescribing to the indie way of life, Pitchfork is a god and a profound and complicated problem.

I first discovered Pitchfork sometime around three years ago. It emphasized the underground music scene and offered more detailed album reviews than Rolling Stone's one-paragraph reviews. Pitchfork was my gateway to new artists, videos and tour information.

Slowly, the effects of Pitchfork began to take place. My pants shrunk, my sweater collection grew and knowledge of new, undiscovered bands became a sport. Perhaps greater than any other website of this decade, Pitchfork's well-documented "effect" not only involves its fans but also the artists it reviews.

The Pitchfork effect can either be positive or negative for fresh acts. Pitchfork has helped bands like The Arcade Fire, Broken Social Scene and recently Vampire Weekend get their break with raving reviews and constant attention. Broken Social Scene's debut album received a review rating from Pitchfork of 9.2 out of 10 and the attention that followed, according to their front man, Kevin Drew "gave us an audience."

On the flip side, albums have hit rock bottom following poor Pitchfork reviews. Take for example former Dismemberment Plan front man Travis Morrison's debut Travistan. The album received a Pitchfork rating of 0.0, effectively leading to a huge drop in sales and an immediate removal from college radio play.

Pitchfork's reviews are often overly verbose, pretentious and self-conscious to a point that the website has created a strong persona attached to the simple act of indie music news. This persona attracts haters for sure, and this seems to be Pitchfork's agenda. As a light traffic web site, Pitchfork survives on word of mouth. If their reviews were like that of Spin magazine, they would be helpful to an extent but not controversial. As we all know, controversy creates conversation.
Page 1 of 3 next >

Article Tools

Be the first to comment on this story

  • NOTE: Email address will not be published

Type your comment below (html not allowed)

  I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Advertisement

Advertisement