There are a lot of idiots operating in web 2.0, aren't there?
Click on this if you can be arsed. The idea being, someone who can't write particularly well (e.g. interesting, incisively, entertainingly) about popular music, claims to be the future of music criticism via Twitter. How fascinating.
sans question mark, hombres.
ReplyDeletehave you seen this guy: http://freakytrigger.co.uk/?
ReplyDeleteMojo once gave me 20 words in which to review the CD reissue of the 1970 England World Cup squad album (with Jeff Astle singles as bonus tracks). Could probably have Twittered that.
ReplyDeleteHe calls Placebo "alt-bummers". Ugh.
ReplyDeleteAlso, at the rate it's going, 1,000 records will have been reviewed by October - then what's he going to do?
Ah, the first 140 characters are easy. It's after THAT you run into problems...
ReplyDelete[...] can’t help it. Someone needs to speak up for brevity and incision (and I ain’t talking wankers using Twitter as some sort of post-structuralist joke). WHY DOES IT ALWAYS TAKE A professional CRITIC 1,000 words TO SAY WHAT COULD BE SAID IN [...]
ReplyDelete[...] took place on Facebook it could easily have happened on Twitter. And I’m wondering. Perhaps that guy was right after all. Perhaps you can (quite easily) review bands via brief sentences of 140 [...]
ReplyDelete[...] really. Fuck reviewing albums in 140 characters or less. Anyone with half an ear and an eye for Elmore Leonard dialogue can do that. The real challenge is: [...]
ReplyDelete