Mr. Schreiber nonetheless regards Pitchfork as a journalistic entity -- and in some ways, it is. But his definitions, which are splattered all over the Post article, are indubitably out of whack: "Honesty is such an important journalistic attribute" (12). And later, concerning dealing out negative review scores, he says, "On a personal level, I feed bad. But on a journalistic level, I don't." Then further on: "It's not about money; It's about journalistic integrity." This blurring of the meanings of words like "honesty" and "integrity" resembles the propaganda of a corrupt government hoping to maintain the last grip of control over a loosening population.

Schreiber has surely recognized the fragile spot on which Pitchfork now stands, since their reputation rests largely on the pawning of opinions, and that's not quite enough to be called journalism. As Kovach and Rosenstiel put it, "A journalist must be smart enough and honest enough to recognize that opinion must be based on something more substantial than personal beliefs if it is to be of journalistic use" (13).

As a result, Pitchfork has been instrumental in eliminating the traditional concept of a music scene. Instead of American scenes like L.A., Seattle, Minneapolis, hot spots have popped up around the world. Some are cities, like Brooklyn or Toronto. However, Toronto is merely the heart of a spirit that ran through all of Canada at the turn of the decade, led by the collective Broken Social Scene. But now even entire countries can develop a musical reputation. First and foremost is Sweden, which has produced more stars of indie rock and electronica in the past five years than any nation outside of the U.S. and the U.K.

If Pitchfork is the first to assert their opinion about a band or album, and the information cannot really be verified, then their view is repeated until it is accepted as the truth. The facts in their reviews (i.e. -- where the band is from, the names of songs, etc) seep into the white space, while unfounded claims get priority treatment in the article. "These new characteristics of what we called the Mixed Media Culture are displacing the classic function of trying to sort out a true and reliable account of the day's events, creating a new journalism of assertion, which is overwhelming the old journalism of verification," explain Kovach and Rosenstiel (15).

Hence, a Pitchfork writer is no different than a television pundit in an argument during a Fox News program like "The O'Reilly Factor." Whoever yells the loudest, hits the right emotional triggers, and confuses the audience with uncommon diction becomes king of the soapbox. The difference is that Pitchforkers exude youth, rebellion, and change, and manage to create a semblance of wisdom.

It's also revealing to compare reviews of two albums that share many traits. Both Anathallo's Floating World and the Decemberists' The Crane Wife evoke Japanese stories and feature multi-song suites dispersed throughout the record. However, in each respective review, these elements were addressed in completely different fashions.

From Anathallo review by Marc Hogan on July 11, 2006: "Floating World's ostensible centerpiece is the song cycle from caroling, discordant 'Hanasakajijii One: The Angry Neighbor' to the, yes, 'Chicago'-like 'Hanasakajijii Four: A Great Wind, More Ash'--although naturally, the tracks are out of order and interspersed with the rest of the album. They're based on a Japanese folktale about a dog digging up gold in a neighbor's yard. Typical lyric: 'I, of wicked deeds, snarling mouth/ Wandered away, wandered by.' Clearly, none of this is Japan's fault" (16).

From the Decemberists review by Stephen M. Deusner on October 3, 2006: "The Crane Wife sounds like their most shapely album to date, resembling a spirited story arc in its set-up, rising action, climax, and resolution. In this structure the three title segments, despite essentially bookending the tracklist, form the album's thematic centerpiece, the music and story meshing gracefully and tenderly to retell a Japanese fable" (17).

Two albums with similar characteristics. Two opinions expressed with muddled gibberish, steering two totally different reviews. Two fabrications of truth. All within a span of four months in mid-2006.

Influential

Pitchfork's influence can be illustrated in many different ways. One is to compare their "Top 50 Albums of 2007" with their "2007 Pitchfork Readers Poll." Here are the top ten albums from both.

Pitchfork Top Ten (18):
10. Burial -- Untrue
9. The Field -- From Here We Go Sublime
8. Battles -- Mirrored
7. Spoon -- Ga Ga Ga Ga Ga
6. Animal Collective -- Strawberry Jam
5. Of Montreal -- Hissing Fauna, Are You The Destroyer?
4. Radiohead -- In Rainbows
3. M.I.A. -- Kala
2. LCD Soundsystem -- Sound of Silver
1. Panda Bear -- Person Pitch

Readers Poll Top Ten (19):
10. Battles -- Mirrored
9. M.I.A. -- Kala
8. Of Montreal -- Hissing Fauna, Are You The Destroyer?
7. Spoon -- Ga Ga Ga Ga Ga
6. Arcade Fire -- Neon Bible
5. Animal Collective -- Strawberry Jam
4. The National -- Boxer
3. Panda Bear -- Person Pitch
2. LCD Soundsystem -- Sound of Silver
1. Radiohead -- In Rainbows

Of all the albums released in the world each year, when it came time to assemble a Best of 2007 list, Pitchfork readers only differed from the staff on two items. Even Pitchfork recognized the uncanny similarities. In the Readers Poll, they wrote, "The rest of the top 10 turned out to mirror our staff selections almost eerily: Eight of your top 10 choices also finished in our top 10" (20). What an odd coincidence! However, it's important to note that readers were only given a list of 100 albums to choose from when submitting their top five choices. That the staff could find the results surprising points to the possibility that they are ignorant of the negative effects of their work. Either that or they are flaunting bad-ass poker faces.

Previous-1-2-3-4-5-Next