I don't know if Big Yawn has a forum to grumble about their reviews. I don't know if the Washington Post does. I don't know if Rolling Stone, Magnet, Spin, Pitchfork, Popmatters, or any other music publications have forums for people to grumble about their reviews. When I want to talk about music, concerts, music reviews, or anything music related, this board is where I go. And my wife as well.
Big Yawn bills itself as "O2 for the musically starved." (it seems as if someone who was STARVED would need food more than oxygen, but whatever) I didn't realize that they billed themselves as a website specific to any certain genre. So when I saw reviews of a couple of country related artists that I was fond of, I though perhaps that they are a website that covers a variety of genres (which is the kind of website I like!). Thus, it was a bit of a shock to read these two reviews that were both condescending to the genre they were dealing with, and the artists in particular. If you're going to review something, at least start my having some respect for the genre you're dealing with.
Originally posted by vansmack:
Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
Did you even read the two offensive reviews?
I did Rhett. But I know better the to make blanket statements about Slate, ESPN, Salon or any other web site because I disagree with an article or two contained therein. And so should someone who writes professionally for a living.
And I don't go to Country Music web sites to read reviews about the new U2 CD. And if they do review it, would I be shocked that they hate it? No. And even if I were shocked, I would definitely not be shocked enough to write a six paragraph critique and post it on a different web site all together.
Doesn't Big Yawn have an avenue for your wife's grumbling? I assume she would have used it first, unless of course her point was to do something completely different then her (somewhat masked) attempt at taking offense to two reviews of CD's she disagreed with. [/b]
