do corporate weeklies still suck? c/d

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

i was reading the first section of this article

http://sfbg.com/37/26/x_sonic_reducer.html

and it got me to thinking. i dig the voice, but its often overblown and the reviews are sometimes confusing / perplexing (anyone see the recent cat power "review"?). the guardian, on the other hand, has more consistent / varied columns and i like their style a bit more (or maybe i just really like the coachwhips). i will still continue to read and dig the voice, but does it suffer from being too high on itself? does nyc need a "guardian"?

― marcg (marcg), Thursday, 27 March 2003 22:07 (twenty-three years ago)

New York Press ain't bad.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Thursday, 27 March 2003 22:17 (twenty-three years ago)

Yes it is.

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 27 March 2003 22:19 (twenty-three years ago)

new times does suck HOWEVER! (my beef w/ sfbg)

the sfbg is a total clique reviewing their friends'/coworkers' records and artificially inflating the worth of the sf noise scene (cf, dotcoms... sfbg writers' former employers?)

ps: did anybody (JESS) read that sfbg "history of noise" trainwreck they made the mistake of publishing a few weeks ago? it was like an errant blog entry masquerading as gonzo journalism... cringe-worthy.

― gygax! (gygax!), Thursday, 27 March 2003 22:21 (twenty-three years ago)

I totally agree gygax! - I hate the New Times (and thus the SF Weekly) on principle, but the Guardian has a) the worst writer EVAH ANYWHERE, including Pitchfork, Mike McGuirk and b) is a total self-serving, self-righteous "club" in the manner described.

And I *love* Camper Van Beethoven, but that's like the THIRD major article on them in less than a year.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 27 March 2003 22:24 (twenty-three years ago)

That cat power review was lovely.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 27 March 2003 22:25 (twenty-three years ago)

seems like the voice and sfbg are equally scene-y and clique-y. but there seems to be a little more in-depth analysis in sfbg. whereas in the voice you have "sounds of the city" which is pretty short and (at times) narrow. sfbg seems to cover more ground.

voice also just publishes some lame writing "experiments" sometimes. things that would look sad in even in a high school newspaper.

― marcg (marcg), Thursday, 27 March 2003 22:26 (twenty-three years ago)

but there seems to be a little more in-depth analysis in sfbg.

well, that degree of depth is easily afforded when you're interviewing your roommate.

― gygax! (gygax!), Thursday, 27 March 2003 22:37 (twenty-three years ago)

boo hiss I write for several New Times affiliates and they let me review Hate Eternal albums so bollocks to the lot of ye

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Thursday, 27 March 2003 23:02 (twenty-three years ago)

I don't agree with New York Press's politics per se (although their current "50 Most Loathesome New Yorkers" issue is pretty damn funny), but their music writing isn't entirely terrible....which, by my standards, means "intersting to read" (whether I agree with the reveiewer's opinins or not). The Voice has gone into a downward spiral of self-important navel-gazing to the point where I get angry reading it, and not in a fun way.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Thursday, 27 March 2003 23:16 (twenty-three years ago)

I think ILX is slowly taking over the entire City Pages music section. It's frightening.

― Dan I., Friday, 28 March 2003 04:05 (twenty-three years ago)

I write for the New Times (SF Weekly and whomever else picks up my piece, bless their syndicated souls). I understand SFBG's stand on corporate weeklies in principle, but I'm not sure it has anything to do with quality of writing (cf Mike McGuirk's aforementioned noise scene piece, which was one of the worst pieces of rockcrit I've seen in some time). I also take issue at the SFBG's occasional baiting of corpweekly employees. Guess what, guys: we need jobs too. And know what? Way before I wrote for New Times, I was pitching the SFBG and never even got an answer back. Castigating the rank and file as a bunch of corpo sellouts is like criticizing some poor schmuck behind the counter at Starbucks, no?

Anyway, I don't think there's any correlation, in the current scenario, between weekly ownership and writing quality. The Voice, in fact, publishes some of the most experimental, idiosyncratic music writing out there. Sometimes it works, sometimes it fails miserably. But in any case, the approach goes directly against the rationalization & profit maximizing that's typical of most corporate enterprises.

Now, if Clear Channel bought New Times, I suppose things could change... (fast forward 5 years to me losing my job, once CC actually does buy NT, and reads this. Doh!)

― philip sherburne (philip sherburne), Friday, 28 March 2003 04:49 (twenty-three years ago)

here's where i admit i don't read any free weeklies (outside the voice) when i'm not published in them

(boo, hiss)

it goes without saying that seattle's weeklies are a fucking trainwreck, one i gave up on a long time ago

― jess (dubplatestyle), Friday, 28 March 2003 05:28 (twenty-three years ago)

Hey Jess, quit yer bellyaching, I still live in Philly!(Did I make you shudder?)
I wrote something for the stranger but it probably sucked.They were nice enough to say that they would like to have me write something longer sometime for them.I have no idea what their reputation is. This thread is the first time that I have ever heard of the bay guardian.But I have heard of the S.F. weekly.

― Scott Seward, Friday, 28 March 2003 05:45 (twenty-three years ago)

heh, i can't remember what the philly weeklies are like, but i'm guessing bad.

i did get into a brief pissing match with joey sweeney when i sent him a nasty email on christmas eve 2001.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Friday, 28 March 2003 05:47 (twenty-three years ago)

I should say that the Philly free papers aren't half bad when it comes to music-related JOURNALISM as opposed to crit.They often do a nice job with the longer pieces. Especially when Philly related.A cool piece on warren zevon's lost philly days, another on local groupies who hung out with Bowie when he was recording Young Americans. Stuff like that. But I think that is usually the strength of any weekly. Reportage stuff that could never get done/fit in a daily.And usually(hopefully)written by younger people who are excited to have the chance.

― Scott Seward, Friday, 28 March 2003 05:54 (twenty-three years ago)

Sweeney can be annoying. They had a full-page picture of his face when he won rock critic of the century or whatever from the altweekly board of governers or somesuch. I still read him but than I will read anything for free. I will go on the record as saying that his nu-metal thing in the best-of music writing book was horrible and just terrible and I hated it and I am probably just jealous that they didn't pick my MTV nu-metal piece that I wrote cuz I was really proud of it even if it was a self-important navel-gazing writing experiment.

― Scott Seward, Friday, 28 March 2003 06:00 (twenty-three years ago)

his end of the year round up that year just infuriated me to no end. but then i just remembered AN ENTIRE PAGE devoted to some "story" about an anna sui scarf he fell in love with. i mean, a whole page! jesus no wonder i cant make any money in this shitty business.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Friday, 28 March 2003 06:08 (twenty-three years ago)

It almost makes me pine for the days when "Slackjaw" Jim Knipfel used to roam the streets of Philadelphia in his trenchcoat and fedora writing gritty Hechtian vignettes on immigrant hot dog vendors and the little kid at the happy buddah Chinese restaurant inscrutably doing his homework by the cash register.He hated uptight "squares" in their "leisure suits".But, come to think of it, he could be pretty funny for a half-blind crazy guy.

― Scott Seward, Friday, 28 March 2003 06:19 (twenty-three years ago)

that Sweeney piece, as I've noted before, is one of the worst pieces of shit I've ever read, far worse than the nu-metal one, which is really bad too.

re that article marc posted: did they actually listen to the Dixie Chicks sing "Landslide" at the Grammy Awards or did they just decide that they were "zombified" for the sake of convenience? based on the kneejerkiness of the piece my guess is the latter, but maybe I'm wrong.

even if I didn't write for them, I'd say City Pages has consistently published some of the best music writing in the country for years now, and the ILx influx just keeps helping it along

― M Matos (M Matos), Friday, 28 March 2003 11:16 (twenty-three years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.