Under the Radar podcast #2
Last month the famously provocative former NME writer Steven 'Swells' Wells died aged 49 after a battle with Hodgkin's lymphoma disease. His passing has led many to comment on the present state of music journalism and lament its apparent lack of authority and credibility, as a legion of bloggers threaten to swipe away the mantle of influence.For our second podcast we investigate the situation in depth, enlisting viewpoints from both sides of the journos vs bloggers divide.
Billy has spoken to Mike Diver, former Drowned in Sound reviewer-in-chief and now online editor at Clash Magazine, and Matthew Young, the passionate blogger behind the influential, Edinburgh-based Song by Toad. Their answers make for a fascinating dissection of the future of music writing.
What's more, we have tracks by a fine array of UtR-tipped bands, including There Will Be Fireworks and Cancel the Astronauts, and we look forward to T in the Park with music from My Cousin I Bid You Farewell, Dead Boy Robotics and Tango in the Attic.
Enjoy, and let us know where you stand on the journo/blogger debate below...
Play: Podcast #2
Under the Radar podcast #2
(Right click and choose 'Save Target As' to save to your computer)
You can subscribe to the Under the Radar podcast at this link.
Running order:
01:20: There Will Be Fireworks - Foreign Thoughts
05:49: Cancel the Astronauts - Late in the City
10:34: Special report: music journalism v blogging (Mike Diver / Matthew Young)
20:18: Second Hand Marching Band - A Dance to Half Death
26:37: My Cousin I Bid You Farewell - The Contented Hearts
30:00: Dead Boy Robotics - We Drown Ourselves
32:59: Tango in the Attic - Jackanory
Words and Podcast: Billy Hamilton, Nick Mitchell
Labels: cancel the astronauts, clash magazine, Dead Boy Robotics, matthew young, mike diver, My Cousin I Bid You Farewell, podcasts, song by toad, T in the Park, tango in the attic, there will be fireworks
20 Comments:
you are all forgetting about one important person....the music fan!
if you look hard enough you'll always find something to talk about!!!
naval gazing in the the extreme!
Hmmm, so bloggers and music writers aren't music fans too? And music fans don't read blogs or music magazines? Struggling to understand what point you're trying to make here Tom.
If anything, the availability of free publishing platforms like Blogger, Wordpress et al has made it possible for all music fans to have their say in a reasonably professional way, and the argument I think Matthew is making is that the power is shifting from the venerated critic to the music fan at home.
What would you like the subject of the next podcast to be? I really am interested to know.
Nick, i think the point i was trying to make was the following, I think the media as a whole are putting too much importance on blogs and bloggers, at this stage anyway.
I truly miss writers of the calibre as Swells. there is no such thing as modern day music journalism, as all the rags out there are just nothing more than whores for the record labels.....and i have to disagree when you say that blogs are allowing music fans to have their say in a professional way, most of the ones i have perused are rambling ranting nonsense (Sb,T, Loveshack, Said the Gramophone are a few of the exceptions).
The next podcast should be about....corporate sponsorship or/and gig promotion....and the effect on the local music scene!
Tom,
I don’t think it’s fair to claim we’ve not considered music fans here, in fact I’d say they’re at the forecourt of the discussion. After all, they’re the ones driving the changing face of music journalism through the way they consume information.
We’re coming at it from the angle of how a music journalist’s role has changed in an era where content is tailored to the music fan’s multi-faceted requirements via, that predominant transmitter of music information, the internet - a medium where impact is gauged by speed rather than depth.
Also, Nick’s point about blogs giving music fans a voice is valid. Yes, 95% of all blogs are left redundant after a month or two, but those that thrive, like Matthew’s SBT, create communities that promote debate, discussion and, quite often, raging arguments between music fans from around the globe.
Billy
I am not saying for a second that the venerated critic is ceasing to become relevant, simply that there is a large amount of music journalism which really doesn't require anything like that level of knowledge, time, or access.
Huge chunks of music journalism can be executed just as effectively by someone who is simply a relatively talented communicator, and it is really only a few in-depth aspects which genuinely draw an advantage from the experience and expertise of the writer.
The other thing worth bearing in mind when discussing intelligent, long-form journalism is that the market for it is either extremely small or just extremely difficult to pin down - probably a little of both. When I put shit-loads of effort into something on Song, by Toad, whether it be the long interview write-ups, the Toad Sessions, or those Broken Records videos, I notice no peak in stats or comments or any quantifiable metric of popularity.
A lot of people with an eye on bean counting could easily decide that this makes this kind of larger-investment (in a time sense) stuff redundant and expendable. Personally, I don't think that, but I can find no actual figures to back me up. I have an instinct that putting more effort into more quality will lead to a publication with a much better reputation and more solid readership, but fucked if I could prove than to an antsy investor.
So the role of the venerated critic is coming under attack from more than just bloggers, I think. As reality TV shows, it is becoming increasingly difficult to make a case for investment and quality in pretty much any form of media at the moment, because a lot of the day to day stuff can be done by pretty much anyone.
As Mike said, goals are important too. The best journalists - again, irrespective of medium - don't simply trot out rudimentary 'facts' or press releases without giving some thought to providing a little extra context or background. I disagree with the his implication that this is a 'bloggers v journalists' question though, although there are certainly plenty of blogs which add fuck all to any wider discussion of music.
Sorry, "prove *that* to an antsy investor", I meant.
I think music promotion, as a topic, is well overdue an article/conversation. Especially as it appears to be doing more damage to local music scenes than good these days (at least that's what I'm witnessing/experiencing this end of the world).
Cheers DC we agree on something at last
I remember the times before the internet when magazines and tv were the only places to find out about new music. Sadly most of those things were very commercial and mainstream, there was no chance of a small band to get to be known outside the small local scene. Now, thanks to music blogs (and also other online music sites) I can find out about small bands across the world. I don't have to rely on what is said in magazines, I can read about a band online and then find out what they are like myself. As with many other professions, music journalism is facing a lot of competition. I take photos and 'everyone' has a camera these days, 'everyone' is a photographer and it is really difficult to get noticed. It is the same with writing, promoting, making music, releasing albums... there is a lack of quality control that concerns me when everyone thinks they can do it. I just hope that in the end people will recognise what is good and what is not so. For the time being it is exciting to see blogs appearing and wondering which ones will stay for a while. One of my definite favourites is The Vinyl Villain http://thevinylvillain.blogspot.com/ which is not all about fanboyism (nothing wrong with that either) and has been about for a while now.
I think both are needed; the 'proper' music journalist who can be the role model, and the blogger (aspiring music journalist perhaps) for the music fan to get the best of both worlds
Heidi
Would definitely like to hear you expand on the "music promotion causing damage to local music scenes" comment DC, being a bit of a slow-burner in the thoughts department I'm not entirely sure what you mean..?
Nick and Billy, In terms of blogging vs. journalism, I think you've answered your own question because you are 'music journalists' turned bloggers and doing a very good job of it. The interactive element, the comments, the podcasts and the mp3s are what makes this more a blog than anything else. Whether you describe the actual writing as 'journalism', 'blogging' or shooting the breeze is really a matter of semantics.
Of course there are some shit blogs which just involve self-obsessed ranting, then there are some good ones, like the ones DC was referring to. It's just a medium in the same way one person can use a guitar to write an amazing tune and someone else can use it to write something utterly pointless, such as the band you featured on this very podcast called the Stereochronics ;-)
Isn't the gripe here about the death of music journalism closely tied to huge disparity between supply and demand and the fact that it's very very difficult to get paid more than a few buttons and a piece of string for doing it, even for proper publications with large print runs. Bloggers who give away other people's music, mostly without permission, can't really expect to get paid for it unless they attract advertisers willing to turn a blind eye to the illegal side of things (though I'm presuming UtR has permission to use the tracks posted), but presumably some free records and other perks make up for this.
This rant isn't really going anywhere to be honest but I thought I'd add my pennies worth!
Milo, yes I think there will be increasing crossover between so-called bloggers and so-called journalists. Excepting the 'elite' strata of paid music writers (and I'm guessing there are only about 10-20 in the whole of Scotland), journalists these days have to be open to the web 2.0 aspects you mentioned.
Likewise, I think bloggers have to inherit some of the basic journalistic standards of critical distance, fact-checking and level-headedness if they want their blog to gain any kind of following in an increasingly oversaturated area.
Milo, I remember you talking a while back about a blog network idea, where a group of like-minded writers combine their efforts into a more robust webzine. Perhaps that could be a future model for engaging, bullshit-free music journalism?
... and I am mortified by the fact that this podcast includes a snippet of the Stereophonics. I had no editorial control over that one!
I'll do my podcast on this question this weekend, and Milo's stolen my thunder with his comment somewhat, the bastard.
Basically, I agree that it's a false dichotomy - blogging and more traditional forms are just a variety of journalistic skills being wielded by a very large pool of people of wildly varying talent.
Any journalist who won't embrace the concept of blogging (and many great journalists now maintain their own blogs, if just for the independence) is being a bit silly these days, frankly. Most major publications now have blogs integrated into their sites, with varying degrees of success.
And as Nick says, any blogger who wants to actually achieve anything had better have a bit more to bring to the party than a website and some music and the willingness to talk shite ad nauseum. Sean from Said the Gramophone has turned his blog into freelance writing jobs for the Guardian, and still others simply make money simply from the blogs themselves, so to separate bloggers and journalists in this instance is a bit false, I think.
But, as Milo rightly pointed out, supply and demand are a long way out of balance at the moment. But within the larger context of a general switch to electronic media at the expense of tangible media, I think the upheaval is coming from a lot of different places at once. A lot of the publications who would employ writers are getting a bit desperate at the moment, and that isn't helping either. Newer online media behemoths should take up a lot of the slack eventually, so I doubt the problems will be too long-term, but that will all come out in the wash, as they say.
Nick, actually I disagree with you about critical distance. I think that is in fact the very strength of blogs - that they have disposed of that distance. I am not saying that I want blogs to be fawning fanboys, but the very fact that they are personal and subjective allows them to take more of the social role that is inherent in discovering music, and that is something the print publications really have to catch up with at the moment, because I see it as a major gap in their offering in the current market.
If there is a personality in there, and an opinion and, above all, a normal, fallible human being then I think it allows you to bridge the huge gap between recommendations from friends and simply being preached to by a detached expert. You need balance, of course, but radio shows the importance of a strong personality to whom people can relate.
I am going to stop leaving massively long comments now. Some bloggers clearly would benefit from the presence of an editor.
What's been overlooked in this discussion, to my mind, is the question of what drives the different kinds of music writing? It's naive to think that "real" music journalists write about bands because they really love them and want them to succeed. And likewise, it's naive to think that bloggers only write from the heart. It's *not* just a matter of semantics. One set of writers is very keen to keep their job and their credibility in the field. The other could really most of the time afford to not care about those things at all. How many bloggers make money from their blogs, enough to live on? few to none and certainly not a lifestyle which professional journalists have.
So, the point I'm trying to make here is that music journalism is always driven by something. But I argue that financial goals don't necessarily trump personal feelings of satisfaction. There is a huge amount of "status greed" in the blog world. Just go look at how many Michael Jackson tracks are listed on the major aggregators this week. Lots of bloggers compete for high hit counts by posting music that they know will attract readers; blogs with both little content and those who really do add to the conversation.
Without a doubt, the kind of music writing that pays the bills is on the decline, perhaps becoming extinct. But bloggers aren't necessarily the best ones to fill their shoes. We're swayed by ulterior motives as well. And we have no one to answer to and none who might reveal our prejudices. The importance of the fourth estate is in it's accountability to the people. There is no consequence for bloggers; we simply lose readers and that doesn't make us have to go out and find a new source of income.
The one thing I do know is that blogs which contain content, actual writing about music with some level of intellectual engagement and research, are the ones with comment-writing communities attached. You gotta say something to be in this game. But as was discussed, what impact on the market do these communities really have?
So, in the end, I'm not so convinced it's that false a dichotomy as some here would like to make out. "Real" music journalists might not be competing with us, but they surely exist under different conditions. The loss of professional journalism is real and I fear living in a society where there are no consequences for simply talking out your ass.
I've asked more questions than I can begin to answer here! Apologies, I'm just a blogger. xoxo
Nick, The vague idea I'd had a while ago for a blog network would be a central hub feeding through the posts of a select number of like-minded, but independent blogs.
It kind of goes along with the point that Matthew made on the podcast regarding getting your music onto 15 or so blogs if you want to make some kind of impact, but in this case the joint effort would hopefully add weight to the individual blogs involved through strength in numbers. It might be more attractive to fledgling blogs than established ones though.
Matthew, I agree about the more personal tone of blogging being more engaging and less preachy, and I don't think bloggers should have to write about music they don't want to write about, whereas often a journalist will have little choice, so I get Tart's point as well about the motivations behind what's being written.
However I have spent a number of years writing what I would term "real" music journalism in that I've carried out interviews professionally, the end product was well structured and well researched and submitted to deadlines etc.
But due to the fact that for the most part I've not gotten paid for doing it (which has actually been a benefit to a point as it's enabled me to be more picky about what I've written about), I don't feel there is such a big difference between the two mediums personally, bar the style of writing (and adapting your style to suit different media is a key journalistic skill, shurely?).
If I set up a magazine myself and wrote articles for that, would it be journalism just because it appears in print and in physical form? Or do we believe it is only really journalism if you get paid? Maybe I should set up a direct debit and pay myself every time I post on my blog.
Anyway I think that has taken navel-gazing to it's logical extreme so I will shut up now...
You can't dichotomise bloggers and journalists/critics because there isn't one thing which necessarily differentiates them - there's lots of factors, meaning you get a load of people who are like journalists in some ways and bloggers in others. Then you get bloggers who write extremely well (contrasting with the stereotype of lazy PR-recyclers and bedroom mumblers) and journalists who write a load of pish.
Unsurprisingly, I think good music writing is important, so I hope music journalism can continue to be a paid profession for as many good writers as possible - whether in personal blogging style, or impersonal critical style. Those who say "I can sample it myself so why bother reading what someone else thinks" have seemingly never read an insightful or amusing article about a band or scene or record before (which is an astonishing oversight).
But we wouldn't be having this discussion if it wasn't for the overall crisis in journalism, which is caused by the internet and extends much further than music scribes. The issues are much the same. Clearly there's a lot of good news/politics/current affairs blogs but they can't do the kind of investigative stuff that, eg, the Daily Telegraph just did to expose all those thieving MPs. Until online advertising rates pick up, any pub going online-only isn't going to be able to sustain their current standards of journalism (and don't get me started on what those are like, anyway). But, fact is, online advertising rates are artificially low, from a combination of uncertainty, technophobia and the recession. Online advertising is so much more effective and targetable than print, it should be worth MORE. But we're running up a hill with that at the moment, so it's no surprise there's doubts about whether we'll ever get to the top.
Ally - I think the problem is that people really haven't figured out how to effectively advertise on the internet yet. That needs to happen before sites with enormous numbers of readers and link-based, Technorati-style internet authority can monetise their readership effectively. Until that happens, or until online publications find some way of making money, this will be a big problem, like you say. I think it will get fixed, but not for a while.
And I also agree that, for all really intensive journalistic work can't really be done by amateurs no matter how good their intentions, this is going to be felt even more seriously in news, political and economic reporting. In music it would be a big shame, but in those fields losing that kind of analysis would be a pretty significant barrier to public participation in democracy. Not that I wish to sound too hysterical, but I do think it's pretty serious.
See here for a similar complaint in the field of science and medical reporting. It's a comment on a post at Bad Science, but it's written by a professional journalist and puts it nicely:
http://www.badscience.net/2009/07/steve-connor-is-getting-eggy/#comment-27010
Milo - what I mean is, in a broader sense, there are, city on city, too many inexperienced promoters out there who are killing the live scene from within by fighting for the same 'name' / 'scene' bands & over the same small number of venues, putting on too many gigs on the same nights, not expanding their knowledge of music available or do any research into what's available (I've spoken to promoters who don't even know how to use the internet properly), not willing to take the risks &, generally, only in it for the kudos.
Cardiff, for example, has about 50+ promoters all fighting for the same outlets &, as an inevitable result, most of the stuff they put on is genuine shite; the flipside to unsuccessfully chasing the 'names' means they end up putting on the most obscure/unknown artists simply to keep their hand in rather than admit they don't know what they're doing - they do little if no actual marketing aside fro pretty posters they publish on facebook & that's it. Then they wonder why they don't have anyone turn up.
There was a promoter summit meeting the other month where all the promoters were invited to discuss the current situation; most turned up (there were some noteable absences by some of the more arrogant promoters) but it was, frankly, a mess. Even when they came together to try & sensibly figure out how so many organisations service one small city, all they did was argue over who was the most senior promoter. Absolutely fucking pathetic.
As it stands we now get live line-ups of bands that simply don't work together (the old faux pas of having a very loud & raucus band supporting a very quiet acoustic solo artist STILL happens regularly & is borne out of promoters 'nicking' suitable bands from each other), too many bands on the same night in venues unsuited to the type of music, all put on the wrong nights of the week at the expense of the audience - who, in vast numbers, generally don't show up. Putting up posters inside a venue, on the night of the gig, is NOT promotion. It's last minute decoration ahead of the same lame excuse:
"I really can't expain it, we're normally packed on a Tuesday - I think the students being away for Easter isn't helping".
There are very simple ways to improve this kind of situation (which I've been told happens in London, Manchester, Norwich, Edinburgh, pretty much anywhere where there's a live scene), but the promoters either don't want to compromise, cooperate, or simply don't want to spend any more time on improving their lot (because they think they're brilliant & everyone else is shit).
I must say, however, I am not doing down ALL promotrs - there are some excellent ones ou there (& some brilliant ones in Cardiff). It's the part-timers & ex-student lot that ruin it for everyone else because they seem to only be involved because of the fleeting / transient popularity it brings them.
Post a Comment
If you do not have a Google account, you can post a message using the anonymous button
<< Home