Readers Write: Pitchfork Editor Promotes Hoax Theory, Gloats About Stats, Still Thinks Dr. Dog Kinda Sucks
Hey Philebrity:I would suspect your local musicians were, as a poster guessed, the subjects of a prank, since the A-Sides received zero votes in our year-end poll. (BC Camplight did get [two votes].) I’m also not sure where you get the idea these groups are “nearly universally critically revered” — that’s a bit much, isn’t it? “revered”?– or that we’re “waningly-popular.” (All of our readership records were set in the past few months, and even in a shit environment for the music *and* publishing industries, we grew across the board last year, sorry).
The Philly bias thing is hilarious though– come on, we even interviewed Daryl Hall last year! Some people just don’t like Dr. Dog, you know? Off the top of my head, Philly artists we have reviewed favorably in the past few years: Man Man, Beanie Sigel, A Sunny Day in Glasgow, the Roots, Clockcleaner, Freeway, Diplo, Spank Rock, Fursaxa. It’s the MOR tunesmiths and psuedo-bar bands we mostly don’t like, but we mostly don’t like them no matter where they’re from. (And don’t drag the Hold Steady into this.)
Thanks for keeping an eye on us though– woo, conspiracy theories are fun!– and for sticking up for your city.
scott——————————–
Scott Plagenhoef
Associate Editor-in-Chief
Pitchfork Media
For the record, Philebrity stands by the original tip and email that spawned this post. Yes, we’re willfully being utter simpletons about the whole anti-Philly bias thing — Plagenhoef knows of what he speaks there — but the tip was eminently trustable. Have at it in the comments if you like, Philadelphia!
Previously: Philly Becomes The Site Of World’s-First As Pitchfork Writer Apologizes To Local Musician
January 18th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
as one of the a-sides, I’d like to make it clear that this was not our post…we were merely mentioned as the ones that get “that elusive tail”. I can only assume that’s in reference to patrick and his bedroom eyes. But with our name in parenthesis at the end of the paragraph it seemed like it was being attributed to us.
Secondly, I would like to state for the record that none of us care. Good reviews are nice, bad reviews are whatever…people can write anything they want and you take that risk by putting music out. We’d probably be angrier if the review of our record was at all intelligible. But as is, hey, it’s nice to have your existence acknowledged at least.
Lastly, that BC Camplight record is amazing.
January 18th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
BC’s record isn’t even out in this country yet..so two votes in the writer’s poll doesn’t sound too shabby to me. Google it Plagendueche, that shit is revered…IN THE COUNTRIES IT’S OUT IN. BTW, my friend is someone in the bands sister…before everyone starts accusing me of being overly defensive.
January 18th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
The more you post about Pitchfork’s waning popularity, the more Philebrity readers check out Pitchforkmedia.com … oh what a viscious cycle! If anything, you’ve helped increase their readership by reminding us 9-5′ers about one MORE website we can read to make the day slink by faster…
January 18th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
some people with a web site don’t like some things.
some people with another web site like said things.
weird.
January 18th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
i tried to post this earlier but it didn’t go through for some reason…
1. as one of the a-sides, I’d like it to be clear that this original post was not from us…i think there was some confusion because at the end of the paragraph our name was in parenthesis making it look like the quote was attributed to us. But really that was just in reference to us “getting that elusive tail” which I can only assume refers to patrick and his bedroom eyes.
2. We really do not care about this at all. Good reviews are nice, bad reviews are whatever…you take that risk when you put something out there. Our feelings are not hurt. It would probably have stung more had the review been remotely intelligible. As is, it’s nice to have your existence acknowledged at least.
3. That BC Camplight record is amazing.
January 18th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
crap it did go through! sorry.
January 18th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
So I second Jon… the review was unintelligible. It’s good to see that a respected songwriter is not deterred by his critics.
A second point.. what DOES pitchfork like??
and a related query…does Animal Collective actually qualify as music?
January 18th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Jon – I am not a slut.
Love,
Patrick
January 18th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
I’d wager that a good amount of Philebrity readers not only are already aware of pitchforkmedia.com, but are also fully aware that’s gone downhill over the last few years. If their popularity has grown across the board, it can probably be attributed to a category of people whom I’ll refer to as “don’t know any better (yet)”.
January 18th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
Yes you are.
January 18th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
If the reviewer truly was “looking at a hard copy of this record,” why didn’t he notice that the “short intro of canned strings” was in fact an actual violin and cello arranged (like all the string parts on the album) by Barthmus? Oversights happen but still.
January 18th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
No worries: just play the A-Sides and BC Camplight records simultaneously for a cumulative score of 11.5. This easily qualifies as the best record of last or any year. GO PHILLY.
January 18th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Yeah, increased readership Pitchfork may have. But the “right” readership? I’m afraid not. Maybe in 2005. Not now though.
January 18th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
Sorry, but MOR tunesmiths kind of nails it. This should be an Ur-text for a new generation of Philly bands.
January 18th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Has anyone seen Cloverfield yet?
January 18th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
cloverfield was decent
January 18th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
just doesn’t make sense to in one breath call bc camplight MOR ( I’m assuming this because he’s certainly not a psuedo bar band) and then rip the record in a review for being too “out there” and schizophrenic. How is a dude that lives in a mental hospital and writes fucked up pop songs about killing people MOR.
January 18th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
(Over)Heard from a dude that works at the Ritz that Cloverfield is the best monster movie he’s seen in like 20 years. Sayin’.
January 18th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
I’m itching to!
January 18th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
John 3:16
January 18th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
I looked at the writers’ lists again and only one writer voted for the B.C. Camplight album. I don’t understand why Joey continues to list two people. Is he fudging his quotes to incite more drama and pageviews?
Also, if Pitchfork didn’t matter, blogs such as Philebrity wouldn’t pick fights with its editors, nor would people go out of their way to diss the site.
January 18th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
I think I enjoyed how well-crafted the idea of Cloverfield was more than the film itself.
January 18th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
The Pitchfork fears The Philebrity!
January 19th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
I think that Pitchfork is a great site for music news, because they cover alot of bands that would fall short of more mainstream online musical publications. And instead of reading like 6 or 7 different music blogs to get a summary of what is going on with the bands that you like/care about.
In recent years, I’ve stopped reading/relying on their reviews as good critiques because the people that write them typically have conflicting tastes with each other and also with myself. This is a perfect example, one writer thought BC’s record was mediocre, where 2 others thought it was in the top 12 of the year. It really does depend on who writes the review. People that say, “Pitchfork loves this band” are wrong because Pitchfork doesn’t know how to love. It is the writers that ulitmately love/hate something. It is just sad how many people take the word of something so inconsistant as gospel with out really even listening to the music for themselves.
January 19th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
The only thing more boring than Pitchfork bashing is trying to figure out who the “right” Pitchfork readership is. Kudos to Pitchfork for having the uncanny ability to attract more detailed analysis from their detractors than from their “readership”. Actually, wait. They’re the same, arent’t they? Nevermind then.
January 19th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
I spot a fatal flaw in your final argument, Mr. Philebrity: “but the tip was eminently trustable.”
Tell me sir, do the words “couldn’t you tell that I’m a liar…” ring a bell??
January 19th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
oh, and grace it’s my understanding that the bc camplight guy doesn’t live in a mental hospital. i heard he was there for about a week. once. personally, it’s hard for me to sympathize with his “i’m so crazy” stance on life when i see the dude all the time at the local hipster hangout trying to look just as cool as the rest of us. “crazy” people don’t go out of their way to be recognized.
January 21st, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Often lame and yes, unintelligible, at least Pitchfork takes the time to listen to the music before they bash it. In their own way, they will actually back up their opinions.
Last year Philebrity slung a bunch of hate at some local bands with their “10 Worst Of” list without offering the slightest bit of reasoning behind their selections. The whole thing reaked of the same hipster popularity contest gutless bullshit Philebrity is so quick to accuse Pitchfork of. I think both publications are bunch of jerks. But yeah, I do read them from time to time.
I also think the A-Sides are a good band.
January 21st, 2008 at 7:24 pm
I think the editor makes a good point.. Philly is well represented on Pitch Fork and throughout the music media as a whole.. It’s just doesn’t happen to be the go no where bar rock suburban transplants are so touchy about.. let’s face the music Philly -The biggest Rock band associated with this town is the Hooter’s!!!!! for gods sake.. ( Hall and Oats are an R/B group)
3rd string State Property artist (who is that? my point- Exactly) garner more sales and interest than many of the rock groups who gripe.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:20 am
I was lying before I really hadn’t seen cloverfield yet… Now I did- It was filled with great moments