PDA

View Full Version : Pitchfork Media vs. Matador Records

TheSadDebaser
06-05-2003, 03:01 PM
Man, I love this. Good stuff.
maroonwalrus
06-05-2003, 03:37 PM
Eh? What is there to this supposed rivalry you speak of besides the occasional "pulling a Pitchfork" comment?
Paul
06-05-2003, 04:24 PM
From today's Pitchfork news update:

"Maybe Pitchfork's publicist (wait, we do have a publicist, right???) could get in touch with a few of these artists who seem to have their heads screwed on properly. Perhaps, then, merciless label heads could learn a thing or two about kissing the ass that feeds them. (Love ya, Cosloy, baby!)

Maybe this has been going on longer, but I've only noticed it happening over the past few weeks. But really, I think Matador would get along just as well without "the Ryan Schreiber factor."
johansen smith
06-05-2003, 05:06 PM
well, at least Pitchfork's being friendly with their ribbing. Lost at Sea claims they stopped recieving promos from Matador after their negative Interpol review.
Paul
06-05-2003, 06:46 PM
Lost at Sea (http://lostatsea.net) = not Pitchfork.
bitterfruit
06-05-2003, 07:27 PM
Pitchfork = grubby little ho's
Futureman
06-05-2003, 10:14 PM
oops. thanks for the correction, Paul.


Actually, Pitchfork has been a great resource for me. I live in a small Midwestern town and have to travel at least an hour to see good shows. Few record stores sell what I'm looking for. Websites like pitchfork keep me posted about what is going on with the bands I like and does a fair job introducing me to bands I otherwise would never hear about. They're not perfect, but they're good enough for me.

Thank God my wife has the same attitude about me.
anagrama
06-06-2003, 12:56 AM
I love Pitchfork....they have written some reviews that in my opinion have been horrendous, but overall....theyre usually spot-on, witty as hell and the entire site just looks good.
Paul
06-06-2003, 01:01 AM
Originally posted by anagrama
...and the entire site just looks good.

You don't really pay a lot of attention to web design, do you? As far a online zine sites go, theirs is one of most claustrophobic and busy/image-heavy sites around.
anagrama
06-06-2003, 01:23 AM
Originally posted by Paul
theirs is one of most claustrophobic and busy/image-heavy sites around.

I personally don't think it is. I dont think its suffocating at all.
I like the layout. Far more than buddyhead or epitonic or nudeasthenews.
johansen smith
06-06-2003, 02:40 AM
I miss the old Nude as the News. the new format and the non-review reviews really leaves me cold.
Futureman
06-06-2003, 09:29 AM
You're right, JS! What the hell happened to NATN? I don't understand the reason for the new format, and the music reviews--if you can call them that--don't have the centrality that they used to.
Gerard
06-07-2003, 02:23 AM
"From today's Pitchfork news update:

'Maybe Pitchfork's publicist (wait, we do have a publicist, right???) could get in touch with a few of these artists who seem to have their heads screwed on properly. Perhaps, then, merciless label heads could learn a thing or two about kissing the ass that feeds them. (Love ya, Cosloy, baby!)'

Paul, I have no idea what this means. They're just too cryptic for me. But if you think they're suggesting that Matador actually owes them anything, then I take it all back --- they _really are_ funny.

as far as the bit about someone being cut off the mailing list for giving Interpol a bad review is concerned, I'm not familiar with the site or the review in question. But last time I checked, nobody was automatically entitled to free cd's.

but getting back to the Pitchfork question, there's no rivalry. We put out records. They do something else entirely.

GC