Let's make some reddit accounts and give 'em a piece of our mind

Let's make some reddit accounts and give 'em a piece of our mind

Other urls found in this thread:

reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/7jds7r/were_the_editors_of_pitchfork_we_just_finished/
reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/7jds7r/were_the_editors_of_pitchfork_we_just_finished/dr5jcph/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

the sjw mods will just ban them all

worth a shot though

just gotta toe the line a little

>implying half of nu/mu/ doesn't already have an account

yeah well i'm trying to start something here, might as well be optimistic

I genuinely would like to ask them why there is such a huge disparity between the review scores they gave out all year and the AOTY list.

i want to ask the whether brand new wasn't included because of the recent news

When is it?

no not ur ARMY

4 PM

Nice trips and would also want to know the answer to this

le Sup Forums army has arrived XD

est? i'm assuming cause they're in brooklyn

yeah, i'd think.

Those two guys are exactly how I'd imagine a couple of p4k writers to look

Ian Cohen is their best desu

on pitchfork they said it's at r/IAmA,
took a look at that page and theres all this shit so i hop it wouldn't be too hard to find

ian cohen got marginalized after he gave SKM a BNM and his review got taken down

Why do they review so much mainstream hip hop?

How many guys have you watched fucking your girlfriends?

don't be autists, ask genuine questions like a normal human being and not a sperg/conspiracy theorist and there shouldn't be any problems lmao

The bigger question is: why do they give this shit 9/10s... (I think we know the answer)

They review pretty much everything

What do they have against RHCP?

It's up

reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/7jds7r/were_the_editors_of_pitchfork_we_just_finished/

shit cat

bump

after everything else this site manages to ruin, i really hope you guys bring it to this one.

Ask these cucks

-Do their wifes sons listen to radiohead?
-Do they listen to radiohead when they prep the bull
-When they buy their soy at whole foods, do radiohead songs have an impact on their decision on certain brands of soy they buy?
-Do sludge/drone/indie/chamber pop genres have a correlation to their soy consumption?

Make an account and ask them yourself

i hope you guys realize they're not going to answer any critical or hard-hitting questions. it's probably just going to end up being one giant circle jerk

>You're best 100 songs list, particularly Bodak Yellow grabbing #1, sparked some controversy on some subreddits. Long time readers claim that pitchfork has evolved into a mere popularity contest and that the music itself has taken a backseat to advancing a social/political narrative. I personally agree that Bodak is an awful #1 pick. Any defense?

Hi this is Matthew Schnipper, Pitchfork's managing editor. Thanks for the questions!

All our lists are decided by votes made up our staff and critic. “Bodak Yellow” was overwhelmingly voted the #1 song of the year. It’s also a song that dominated 2017 to many people in many different ways. That’s not entirely here nor there—so did Ed Sheeran and he didn’t make the list, or something like Pentatonix for that matter—but its cultural importance is certainly one of the factors that make it number one.

But a lot of people, many of them who work at and write for Pitchfork, think it is a great song. I agree. Cards B is sometimes a better rapper than other times, but she’s pretty much perfect on this song, which is funny, punchy, mean. It’s just a great anthem.

slick trips

nigga old moo had them too don't kid yourself that not something that's changed

sometimes

wasn't expecting any better responses from them than this

>Why does a 9.0 (A Crow Looked at Me) land at 14, while SZA's CTRL (my #1 AOTY), earned only an 8.4 & yet is #2 on your AOTY list?

Scores are a tricky thing. What makes an album a 7.0 versus an 8.0 is of course subjective to the reviewer and his or her thoughts. Our year end rankings, as we mentioned, are voted on by a lot of people, all with their own varied opinions. An album like A Crow Looked at Me is so powerful, so good at what it does, and that’s what earned it such a high score. Other records scored less high may have some artistic flaws, and are graded as such, but really just grow on people, resonate with them. We honor those votes and what motivates them.

—Matthew

>Hi, why did ambient music get snubbed on the year end list? 2017 was an amazing year for ambient music, which was reflected in your reviews during the year. In my opinion, there were many albums that were a breath of fresh air for the genre. Some notables I’d be curious to hear thoughts on are Narkopop, Mono No Aware and Reassemblage, since they received very good reviews from Pitchfork.

In this case, it's the way the vote went, we have a lot of people voting and it's harder sometimes for smaller records to break through. We will be doing genre lists very soon and you might see some of these records honored there. -Mark

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

lol fuck off melon

>how do you guys come about rating songs/albums in general? is it based on a collective vote or just based off whichever writer decides to cover whichever album and it’s then approved by you guys?

Ratings are a collaboration between the writer and the editors, there are conversations happening about ratings every step of the way, from the initial pitches to the assignment all the way to the day before publishing, there is a lot of back-and-forth on it. -Mark

>n-no...

lol

Cohen and Camp are their only decent contributors, and both have been alienated by the website.

P4k will be dead in 5 years.

reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/7jds7r/were_the_editors_of_pitchfork_we_just_finished/dr5jcph/

it begins

>P4k will be dead in 5 years.
It's gonna be a Billboard-lite + Netflix reviews website in 5 years.

p4k is already dead.

>no way they'll answer any of these

they're only answering soft ball questions, basically blaming their own dumb staff for their shitty end of the year lists

pitchfork officially died two years ago when conde nast took over

>We don’t obligate anyone to listen, people are free to vote as they choose. That said, people on staff certainly campaign for favorites to get heard, and a lot of discussion is had. I know I spend a ton of time listening at year end to make my own ballot and some playlists do get circulated. We do expect anyone who votes is making a very informed decision, but it’s impossible for everyone to have listened to everything.

Basically saying that their staff is a bunch of 20 year old retards who say KENDRICK IS DA BEST and I don't have to listen to any of that white boy shit. They're admitting to being cucks

>Mark knows how uncultured his staff is now

ain't no buddy give a fuck about no "ambient" music lmaooo that shit just noise like nigga go outside

real niggas check the score for the new lil ___ album then dip

I agree the decline started with the corporate takeover, but they still hold some relevancy. I feel like it’s going to have absolutely 0 relevancy in 5 years time for serious artists.

It does leave a large gap for a new publication to take its place, though.

Any anons here wanna make an online mag with me?

kendrick isn't bad, but the fact that 75% of their bnm is mumble rap and pseudo-rnb is inexcusable

Heres one: how come you faggots give weight to any opinion on a matter as subjective as music preference?

Because I can respect the opinion of someone who has listened to and reviewed thousands of music albums over someone who doesn't listen to anything outside of top of the charts pop?

>theres people who actually think like this, will defend and even fucking pay for this.
HOLY

>How can you stand behind eviscerating promising, upcoming bands (Diet Cig review) but routinely applaud the gigantically mainstream music scene? Do you think you brought valuable exposure to Beyonce that she couldn't have gotten without you by reviewing "Lemonade"?

>Every artist and genre (and every record) has its own context and we try to engage with each on its merits. Pitchfork has always covered a mix of underground music and mainstream music. I don't think of criticism as primarily about providing exposure (though that certainly happens), but rather engaging with records, developing and sharing ideas, and trying to communicate something of value to the reader. -Mark

Why is the context identity politics 85% of the time?

Because it actually isn't all that subjective, mainly due to the fact that you have no clue as to what the words "subjective" and "objective" mean.

>Why DAMN. over CTRL?

>Another great question. Again, the easy answer is it was voted that way. But I think you’re asking why do we think people voted that way. Here’s what I think: Kendrick Lamar is basically unstoppable right now, putting out songs and albums that are among the best rap records ever. DAMN. is basically a flawless piece of music. As some people noted, SZA’s score was below other things that ended up ranking below it on the lists. I think, in a really technical way, there are some flaws in her album. Some songs are better than others. But that overall imperfection ends up being what makes it so special. She’s a very real person making a very real record. People aren’t perfect. Even Kendrick. But he’s pretty close. —Matthew

What aspect of music preference isnt subject to the perspective of the individual listener?

>how the hell did the dream daddy theme get on the list?

>How is the Dream Daddy theme not on other lists is the real question. —Matthew

>theres people who actually think like this, will defend and even fucking pay for this.
and why do you give a fuck user? what bearing does my enjoyment of music reviews have to do with you if we're gonna go down this cliche route

What does the shit you just typed out have to do with objectivity? Have you actually tried looking up words in a dictionary before using them?

Can someone ask why actual experimental music never receives anything higher than a 7.6, whilst derivative albums, masquerading as experimental get 8+ left and right?

>Cohen and Camp are their only decent contributors
Simon Reynolds desu

>objective: (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
What part of an individual's feelings or opinions on music is objective again?

because

>Matthew SchnipperManaging Editor
>Matthew Schnipper is the former editor-in-chief of The FADER, and a former editor at The Verge and GQ. He is based in New York.
Really makes you ponder.

Nice. Now can you quote the example sentence given right under that definition that you just grabbed off dictionary.com? It should be in a slightly smaller, grey font.

>"historians try to be objective and impartial"

>Top 100 songs of the year
>20# Calvin Harris "Slide" [ft. Frank Ocean and Migos]

you already know the answer to that

that song is really good tho

lol

>DAMN. is basically a flawless piece of music.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAH

>DAMN. is basically a flawless piece of music.
Even as a K-Dot stan, I can say that this is complete bullshit. "Yah", "Element", and "God" are shaky songs that lack focus or good melody. His rapping on every single one of these tracks is sedated and disconnected, and I feel like he's trying too hard to emulate a style instead of owning that style as he has in the past. DAMN. is a great album in my opinion (I'd give it a 8/10), but "flawless"? Then why the fuck did it get a 9.2? And if CTRL is a close second, why the hell did it get an 8.4? It's almost like their rating system is inconsistent, arbitrary bullshit.
>but individual reviewers!
No. They haven't placed emphasis on individual opinion in years.

The sad thing is pitchfork won't hire you nowadays if you don't have a twitter that they can use to further their brand.

It's funny how you can actually have the definition of the word right in front of your nose and still not understand its meaning. It is perfectly possible to have an opinion about a certain topic and still be objective about it. This is literally how all proper argumentation and discussion goes. It is no different when it comes to music and its value when taking into account the western canon.

I was expecting the taste to be a bit more Avant Garde t b h, guess that's my bad

mans not hot making the top 100 is worse

'No'

>Objectivity is a central philosophical concept, related to reality and truth, which has been variously defined by sources. Generally, objectivity means the state or quality of being true even outside a subject's individual biases, interpretations, feelings, and imaginings. A proposition is generally considered objectively true (to have objective truth) when its truth conditions are met without biases caused by feelings, ideas, opinions, etc., of a sentient subject. A second, broader meaning of the term refers to the ability in any context to judge fairly, without partiality or external influence. This second meaning of objectivity is sometimes used synonymously with neutrality.

does sara520’s dad own pitchfork

it's pitchfork, they are one step from the billboard list and the y know it, unfortunately their readers don't

What a shitty ama

she's the latest sjw mod of r/indieheads

She's a moderator at indieheads, and all of he mods there will literally go to any extreme to defend Pitchfork. It's super weird, I'm only slightly exaggerating when I say that they would probably be willing to step in front of a speeding train.

Why don't you read the rest of the article while you're at it? You wouldn't be having your shitty tantrum if you actually bothered reading the next sentence, or even the rest of the wikipedia page.

They're all on /r/indieheads

>how do you make your year end lists and when do you start planning it? how do you get to a consensus? is there a person with a final saying? glad to see you guys always pushing for more diversity, but wish you gave more attention to acts outside the anglosphere

>Everything we review automatically in on our long list of records, and then every voter can add any additional albums/songs they want. We use a custom voting tool that is kind of like a Netflix queue. —Matthew

Called it.

>70 people voted on the year end list
and they're probably mostly contributing writers who also do stints writing for cosmo or billboard and shit

Why don't you read Plato before you @ me

i dont support pitchfork-- i tihnk it is hyper capitlaist clickbait site devoid of any real journalism. turns genuine diy movements into over the counter culture points.

however i cant stand how most of their criticism saying they support to many women or minorities. these criticisms seeme based on racism and misogyny and bigotry and to add to that rape apologism.

Why don't you suck my dick and use the time you're doing so to try and think up some proper arguments?

I'd rather you stick it between my thighs like the mighty greek philosopher you pretend to be

how many times do i have tell u fucks how p4k works

Pitchfork puts music into two categories:

1) music that is trying to be meaningful

2) music that is trying to be fun

These are further divided into subcategories:

1) music that is trying to be meaningful
>1(a) music that is trying to be meaningful but isn't
SCORE: 0-5
>1(a) music that is trying to be meaningful and is
SCORE: 5-10
>1(a)(1) meaningful music that is boring
SCORE: 5-8
>1(a)(1) meaningful music that is interesting
SCORE: 7-10


2) music that is trying to be fun
>2(a) music that is trying to be fun that isn't fun
SCORE: 0-4
>2(b) music that is trying to be fun that is fun
SCORE: 4-10
>2(b)(1) fun music that is new and interesting
SCORE: 6-10
>2(b)(1)BONUS music that is fun and new and interesting and manages to be meaningful despite itself
SCORE: 7-10
>2(b)(2) fun music that is the artist repeating an established formula
SCORE: 4-7

their "support" is really biased though, as some have said they don't discredit artists like xxx or freddie gibbs with their rape allegations but decide to ERASE completely white artits with similar accusations, it's all a bussiness move

you forgot the extra 2 point bonus if the musician is a sexual or racial minority

>most of their criticism saying they support to many women or minorities.
the problem is they mainly do this via established major label top 40 charting artists

nah

That's still way too high.

For what it's worth: P4k are known to overrate everything. A 6.2 is essentially mediocre (or worse), and they've been known to do that with indie rock a lot.

looks like it's over