Rolling Music Writers' Thread

Since there's no longer (and hardly ever was) an I Love Writing board, and since there are a quite a few pro and amateur hacks here, I thought it might be worth starting a general purpose thread for the dark art.

I don't really consider myself a journo, having only had a couple of things published here and there (mostly for free might I add), but it would be good to get more stuff in print I admit. It would be interesting to hear more from people who've been doing it for longer than I have.

To get things rolling, I thought I'd ask a staple question that I think may have been toiled over before on ILX, regarding use of the first person in gig and LP reviews. Is this generally considered unacceptable in anything less than the most stylistic circumstances? Or does it really not matter too much? What about the use of "this writer" (don't really like this myself, I'd rather use "I/me" than "this writer", but that's just a personal thing).

Anyway, feel free to discuss whatever you like about music writing and journalism here.

I've said before about how I always hated that "The NME was told by Morrissey'" which is fine on the news page, but when it's "Morrissey bought the NME a drink and began .." on an interview, it's dumb.

Wrt first person: depends on who you're writing for and what kind of piece it is. Personally speaking, I've often had issues with the idea of "objective" criticism, so pretty much everything I've written, music-wise, has used the "I." But I've also avoided writing album reviews for publication, preferring to keep to autobiographical essays, short takes on singles, and blog posts, and in those contexts, no one's had an issue with it.

I often use first person, though rarely in a particularly deliberate way. It doesn't seem like that big a deal to me.

Something I've noticed that crops up in features like that, something that isn't necessarily wrong per se, but I feel is one helluva boring way to start one of these goes along the lines of: "It is 3:17pm on a rainy Monday afternoon. The NME sits in a Harringey spit'n'sawdust boozer sipping a pint of Timothy Landlord..." etc. What I mean here is that the intro seems to tell you more about the time and weather and location of the actual interview than about who is being interviewed. Whenever I read features like this I tend to stop reading much past the first paragraph.

3:17pm on a rainy Monday afternoon. The NME sits in a Harringey spit'n'sawdust boozer sipping a pint of Timothy Landlord

^ very accurate summary of state of british indie rock in the 09, though

"It is 3:17pm on a rainy Monday afternoon. The NME sits in a Harringey spit'n'sawdust boozer sipping a pint of Timothy Landlord..."

if you're gonna "set the scene" like this the best way to do it is to say "[the artist] sits by the swimming pool sipping a mojito" - the i/v is about them after all

i mean all obv dependent on what kind of feature, which publication &c &c &c

"[the artist] sits by the swimming pool sipping a mojito"

The Lex interviews Raygun.

I tend to use first person if my experience is an important part of the total picture. If I'm writing a piece that's based on a phone interview and three listens to the album, I don't do it; but if the publicist has flown me to Ireland to spend three or four days with the band, fuck yes I'm gonna inject myself into the story because I am then part of the story. I never use first person in CD reviews.

there's no i love writing board per se but consider this thread. a not-just-music writers' discussion might be fun.

New: "I Love Writing"

the first person thing is tricky. back when I wrote for the village voice many many years ago it was practically required in music reviews. as time went on many publications took the opposite tack, pretty much banning the "I" these days in the NY Times reporters are required to don this pseudo anonymity which I think reads terribly. instead of "so and so told me that..." it's "so and so told a reporter" waht? was it YOU or just some other random journalist who happened to be in the room?

ha, you *are* the room!

Maybe 5% of music writing in the first person isn't hacky. I see it as a huge red flag. Unless it's absolutely necessary to the story, don't do it, imo.

How is it "hacky"?

Maybe 5% of music writing in the first person isn't hacky.

On second thought:

Maybe 5% of music writing in the first person isn't hacky.

o here we are slagging off writers again, that didn't take long at all

there are different kinds of first-person usage. the kind i can't stand is the showy first-person narrative, where the writer becomes some kind of presence. but there's also just the casual "i" where it can be sensible and unobstrusive. "i love the first two tracks" doesn't seem more objectionable to me than "the first two tracks are great" -- they're both obviously subjective statements of personal preference. but i know some editors who will reflexively remove every "I" from copy, so it's good to know the standards you're writing to.

Just slagging off the hacks. If you'd like to defend bad writing, have at it.

My favourite one, (iirc)

"Kirk Brandon formed Theatre of Hate around the same time as I joined the NME. At the time, we were both unknown..."

(Can't remember the writer)

(many xposts)

I mean, I get into this argument all the time. Generally, I don't CARE about the writer. If the writer was an interesting person, I'd be reading an article on THEM, not the artist I care about. Like wow, the Jesus And Mary Chain helped you get through high school. You and America, buddy.

Generally if a piece of music writing has the word "I" in the first sentence, I usually stop reading, real talk. Save it for your dream journal.

The sad shit is now most mag writing is indistinguishable from internet writing because rates are so low.

Not that there isn't exceptions blah blah blah strawman lol flame etc

What about "I don't know about you but I'm fucking sick of this indie-lite electrodribble that permeates every airwave within earshot"?

Whiney, you do realize you just used the first person yourself five times in two sentences yourself, right?

I'm posting on a message board, not writing for a paycheck!

the mark richardson thing about lovely music in stylus is pretty much verbatim all the first person objections ur spoutin btw but imo its top5 great but I suppose its kinda like how it used to be pretty awesome when Buffy had to make some inspirational speech but in the last series she did it every episode and it was really tiresome?

xp (And I just used "yourself" twice in one sentence, duh.)

Anyway, first person is a tool, like any other tool. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. (As an editor at the Voice, I was frequently known to edit sentences from pitch emails back into submitted reviews in part because the emails did use the first person, and sounded less stiff and stilted and more conversational in the process. I.e., sometimes it helps make for better writing just because that's how people talk. So I've never bought the idea that "writing for a paycheck" required "detaching yourself from the subject.")

Again, i'm not saying that it's always bad, but there's not a lot of writers who can pull it off without sounding like My First Fanzine

"The first time I saw Spoon..."

So why would print them (unless it was a really good fanzine?)

Still, especially when space on the page is at a premium -- which it was even when wordcounts could get away with being ten times higher than they are now -- wasted words are wasted words, "I" included. (Though at least "I" is a fairly short word.)

the mark richardson thing about lovely music in stylus

Think you mean Mike Powell, but Mark Richardson is a good example of someone who uses the first person to excellent effect in his Resonant Frequency column.

oops yeah

If you can write entertainingly, I forgive your first person narrative.

xhuxk on point

xp "So why would print them?", I meant.

Anyway, bottom line is, no fucking way does the the detached pseudo-objective tone used in most glossies and daily newspapers make for better music writing than what I was printing week in and week out in the Voice for ten years (though sure, a few pieces I published may have sounded "Internetty" or whatever. Point was to have lots of different voices, so it'd be a miracle if anybody approved of all of them. I didn't want to ban Internetty writing -- which can be good too, sometimes -- either.)

On the other hand, I like the creativity with which guys like Sanneh at the Times have managed to get around the limitations against first person and swear words. A smart writer can work within those perimeters, too, and make it entertaining anyway.

its funny you mention sanneh--his profile of michael savage in the nyer from a couple weeks ago was very careful about not using "i" (which i think is generally a no-go in the nyer, except in the personal essays they publish every once in a while) but still managed to tell a set of interesting stories about sanneh's own encounters w/ savage that sort of hinged on sannehs own specific experiences trying to set up an interview... in the end, though, i thought it would have been a better piece if they had let him use an authorial I

wow that got convoluted

I thought about that, too.

Over the years, Savage has noticed that his disdain for the mainstream media is widely reciprocated ... So when he received an e-mail from a journalist asking for an interview, he was deeply suspicious. He read the e-mail on the air — he kept the writer anonymous, and didn’t mention that the request came from The New Yorker — and then asked his listeners, “Should I do the interview or not?”…

About a week later, Savage revisited the topic — “my continuing correspondence with a big-shot magazine writer.” He quoted the latest exchanges, along with his tart response, in which he asked, “Why must all of you in the extreme media paint everyone you disagree with as demonic? Why is the homosexual agenda so important to the midstream media?”

...

When he invited the journalist into one of his undisclosed locations, he proved to be a first-rate host, chatty and solicitous. A steady supply of beer refills lubricated the conversation (one of his earliest books was “The Taster’s Guide to Beer,” which was published in 1977), and as the temperature dropped and the sky above Berkeley started to turn orange, he seemed to be working hard to stay suspicious, despite himself. On his next show the next day, a caller asked how the interview had gone, and Savage described his interlocutor: "If I told you he looked like Obama, I wouldn't be far from the truth." Coming from him, this sounded like a deeply twisted compliment.

Sanneh has to resort to speaking of himself in the third person ("the journalist," "his interlocutor") but otherwise does a decent job with passive-ish phrases like "a steady supply of beer refills lubricated the conversation."

no i think you're OTM, that NYer piece was convoluted. it read to me like sanneh had a personal 1 on 1 reaction to savage that was quite different than what he expected and the resulting article would have been more effective and immediate using the "I" but the NYer has always employed a certain lofty distance from its subjects, even in the 70s it wasn't really into the personal/new journalism thing. well apart from pauline kael I guess.

but journalists do have to meet readers half-way. my problem with a lot of the vintage village voice stuff is that it's so personal to the point of being impenetrable or off-putting.

the best first person stuff illustrates how the subject of an interview interacts with other people, rather than "setting the scene"

i'm guessing whiney's not big on fiction as a rule.

I'm not big on fiction as a rule either, and one of the principles that was drilled into me when I started writing was that first-person is something you have to earn--expecting the reader who's never heard of you before to go along with I-I-I-me-me-me instead of saying "So what?" and moving to the next item is not generally a good idea--but I love first person writing even if (despite whatever reputation I may have for it due to the 33 1/3 book) I don't use it all that often professionally.

matos if you don't mind me asking: you're not big on fiction as a journalistic device or (gasp) you don't like reading novels?

I don't write fiction or about music, but first-person is the default in my area of writing (analytic philosophy). Sometimes we resort to the royal "we" if we're feeling nervous about first-person. But it was made clear to me that third-person is to be avoided, as is passive voice.

hang on, you're not big on reading fiction...at all?!

xp!

xp I don't buy the "have to earn" thing. I'm not even sure what it means. If I listen to a song sung in the first person, I might be able to relate to, and be moved by, the song even if I'm unaware of the singer's specific biography. Not sure why reviews are necessarily different. You don't have to be a famous writer to have a life that creates a context.

i thought he meant less that you have to earn it in the sense of being already famous or noteworthy, but in the sense that you have to earn it through your writing--i.e. you have to justify use of the first person in the piece itself, not necc explicitly, but at least in making your "I" of interest to the reader

When it's well done - and it does have to be superbly well done, and yes, generally (but not always) "earnt" - first-person music writing is my favourite of all music writing. (And when it's pointlessly done, the reverse holds true.)

For my own part, I avoid it at least 95% of the time - but then I come from a personal-blogging background, and taking "myself" out of the equation was a deliberate, sought objective.

My first piece at the Voice (when no reader could've had any idea who I was) and a couple soon after were in the first person, fwiw. I seriously doubt they would have improved if the "I"'s had been edited out. (Whether they stunk regardless is another question, but they wouldn't have stunk less.)

Editorial "we" -- first person plural -- bugs the hell out of me no matter what, though. I never buy it, and I've fought editors to keep it out of my own writing (which usually they've been open to).

And btw, I've also edited at Billboard, where first person is almost never allowed. So it's not like I don't know that drill. I just don't like it much.

Of course, at Billboard, the writing tended to be more news and less review-oriented. (So first person would have probably have made no sense anyway.)

Since this is the thread for the most awesome music writers, re-posting this from my Facebook. in case anyone lives near me. you never know. Peace and rock and lots of -isms to all of you:

Modern medicine and talk therapy means I'm actually excited for this! Yay! Like a person! And I'm so honored that the awesome and amazing Karen Schoemer asked me to read. She is a poet/performer unlike any other. Go see Sky Furrows if you ever get a chance! Best band. Karen used to edit Byron Coley's singles column at Spin once upon a time. Oof! That is the height of grunge. Pretty soon you realize that "with", "of", and "your" are always going to be "w/", "o'", and "yr" and then you find yourself using the word "skree" a lot in your own writing.
Love Feeding Tube and Byron and Ted and Conrad and Battlin' Bob Fay. Love Eric and Ron. Love to all. Come to this and buy the weirdest records on earth and say hi and celebrate Karen's new album.

https://dromedaryrecords.bandcamp.com/album/august

https://scontent-bos5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/559646302_10163853504097137_564899657711875886_n.jpg?_nc_cat=106&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=127cfc&_nc_ohc=bmDh8JSkwdUQ7kNvwFHIgrB&_nc_oc=AdnWMB2ynlWsQTx_zgbWnjwakyuTQ1Ni-oRHQdufS2k95ivAWRPNCbPJ_G86Fhhn1EO5VuLMa_nJZQcgisHszEti&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent-bos5-1.xx&_nc_gid=iR9-V7zar8kAKQ5MyueTPA&oh=00_AfeGEKXqgw1HClGawpiyfW185S8DVL1ryZyEn4xVoADCog&oe=68ECAD0F

_You don't read them to chase status as a sophisticated expert, you read them because they make being deep into the art look fulfilling and exciting and fun._

a lot of people, writers and readers alike, confuse these two things, but of course i agree. and i find writers who are good at making the shallow deep and vice versa fun and exciting to read.

This is what I often try to impart to my writing students, particularly poets, when they revolt against poetry that isn’t immediately legible or happens to be more ambiguous in its aims— we do not live in a stable world or engage with a stable language, and isn’t it more interesting to work within that kind of dynamic language environment than to write and read for comfort only? This isn’t a dismissal, but more an invitation, always!!

Which is appropriate for Scott's post as well---gonna read some of your recent stuff, Scott?

x-post-

anyone know if there's someone at the helm of Maggot Brain at the moment?

MM seems to be dealing w/ some significant health issues - enough to start a GoFundMe.

i emailed the address in the magazine and haven't heard anything back - which, of course, is entirely possible even if he's working every day, I get that. just curious if by chance anyone knows if there's someone else working on it or if production kind of pauses if he's out of commission or whatever ...

― alpine static, Monday, September 29, 2025 10:23 PM (two weeks ago

Mike McGonigal's Go-Fund Me for his health related issues hasn't had a status update posted since his August 24th - Lost my job, and could really use some help with upcoming heart/ etc procedures etc. while I sort this out!
Much love--

He also says--I continue to work on my gospel history book for FSG/MCD, and am so grateful to have that opportunity, but that advance was spent long ago. I don’t know if I should do a patreon or substack, or what, but will figure something out. In the meantime, I have really fun gospel reissue projects in the works for other labels, continue to do my weekly gospel radio show for CJAM in Windsor/Detroit and XRAY FM in Portland, I just contributed to a cool new collection of writings on Harry Smith, and I'm extremely proud of the 21 issues of Maggot Brain that have been completed thus far. It’s really weird to beg for $ here, from you my friends, when the world is ending. But just the littlest bit will help a lot, and I don’t know what else to say.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/mike-mcgonigal-further-heart-help?attribution_id=sl:bd31cdba-81e2-4203-89b8-bcbe852f270f&utm_campaign=p_cp+share-sheet&utm_medium=copy_link_all&utm_source=customer

https://tapetrade.io/blog/music-as-community?fbclid=IwZnRzaAN8kBxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEeBxMlLJi0LufoEMfb62fXDIj6izVXp_m-OOqe7IoW3pWKD1WbMjBbHuse5x8_aem_iuT2k9HvLTxdRgkx-qTaPA

Evan Minsker was a staffer at Pitchfork for awhile. Got laid off via zoom he writes. Now he’s doing something else to pay the bills it seems , and is happily writing about punk bands and seeing them now for fun and not as a job

Changes at Stereogum

https://stereogum.com/2478838/stereogum-relaunch/news

God damn, they are trying, aren't they? I have nothing but respect and admiration for the 'Gum for continuing to fight on a battlefield that is increasingly uphill.

And it's true: they pay no more than a week after publication. Unheard of.

I love writing for them. It took a couple of years for jazz publicists to recognize the reach my column has (not just the number of people who read it, but the fact that they are readers previously unavailable to jazz artists), but now I am at the top of promo lists.

i'm sad i won't be able to read the comments anymore but good for them

nitpicking, but wish the redesign would tackle the content/image presentation a bit. one thing about stereogum (and most niche/specific publications) is that it's a bit hard to get engaged/past a generic image/funny-nondescriptive hed sometimes. I know budget is so small, but I really think there could be smart ways to do it, separate small news items, reviews, historical pieces, interviews, original content a bit. Idk. It's also the bane of CMS and dev/coding/product leading these projects, everything looks the same, and to me, it kinda loses a pov almost a bit.

(I know how stupid I sound writing this in the Writers' thread, but I wish all of this so all good music writing can be read more, have more attention and care to it, and have a presentation that uplifts/works together/is a bit different.)

No it's true - they need a 1-2 sentence subhead/intro in small type to give you a flavour

I’m gonna subscribe once my financial world feels a bit more settled but man is it weird to not be able to check the site for news several times a day

Penske Media site Rolling Stone has just laid off writer Brittany Spanos after 11 years; and writer Andre Gee after 3 years. Spanos had done profiles of Taylor Swift and Harry Styles; Gee, who also has a substack had done interviews with Lil Wayne and billy woods. Saw this news on X

Jeff Bezos & his hired right wing Brit publisher horribly slashed from the Washington Post today much of the arts coverage including editor Jon Fischer ( who was once a great Washington City Paper writer & editor), Classical music critic Michael Andor Brodeur, and pop music critic Chris Richards. Also the book section, the sports section, & overseas writers and more. They laid off 1/3 of the Washington Post staff (The Post had already shrunk in size from earlier buyouts). Richards is starting a substack now he announced on IG.

Marc Masters has posted on his social media that Bandcamp Daily is dropping his Experimental Music monthly column as they restructure the site. Masters had been doing the column there for 7 years

Shit. I was planning to send in my next album.

That really sucks. "Restructuring" for what?

That sucks. :(

where did you see this, curmudgeon? i can't find him on Bluesky anymore.

Facebook post:

Bandcamp Daily is retiring my Experimental Music Column. I have two more to do (March and April) before it's gone for good. Bummed but it lasted 7 years so I can't really complain, that's like 100 in internet-writing years.

He also put it in an Instagram story where he did a follow up saying that 80% of the experimental music he covered is not really covered anywhere else .

Masters is not on Bluesky anymore. He does a Music Books podcast, and the Spindle - a podcast about 7” singles ( mostly old punk I think)

from Bluesky: "I guess the only thing I can add to the recent BC discourse is that the writing on the site has not been good since the union folks were laid off"

people just write anything that pops into their head on the internet, man

I mean Marc M is absolutely a killer writer but I'd like to think that when various folks no longer wanted to write for them after that layoff the overall quality suffered no matter what. (Obv. I was one of said folks, granted.)

Franz from The Hold Steady's Substack

https://pianofighter.substack.com/p/more-like-cut-and-paste-magazine

NY Times pop music editor for 11 years Caryn Ganz announced on her socials that she is quitting the Times. I didn't see any details on why, just her posts about what she is proud of over her time there.

Anyone want to conjecture about the economics that allow GQ to (presumably) pay to send Gr*yson C*rrin to Portland for four days - across two different trips w/ flights and (I assume) lodging - to write a 13,000-word feature on Modest Mouse?

I'm genuinely curious. That's a level of freelancing at which I have not worked and I guess I'm a little surprised it exists, but what do I know?

Grayson is a hiking/outdoorsy dude and is always going all over the country to go on cool hikes. Would not be surprised if he was RV-ing it or camping.

The level of freelancing you're describing was pretty common in the '90s but even the biggest places are rarely doing fly-outs for anyone not on staff these days

Yeah, I added "(I assume) and lodging" at the very last second, but thought that might not be part of it. He could also have friends w/ a spare bedroom in Portland.

Maybe there were other cost reductions for the mag, too. I guess I'm just surprised anyone wants 13,000 words on Isaac Brock that bad.

I feel like GC is the last man standing for this kind of thing (except for, say, New York Times or New Yorker staff writers). But I also feel like he's the new Cameron Crowe - I mean, he's not someone you hire to write a hard-hitting exposé. He's the guy you hire to share Indie Rock Vet #4080's Deep Thoughts on Maturity and Art.

I have no idea how any of this works, so apologies if this is a naive question, but is it possible an artist's label / publicity team is footing the bill for the expenses on big pieces like this? I mean providing it isn't a hit piece or something, a longform advertorial in a prestige glossy seems like it would be mutually beneficial

Oh yeah, that absolutely happens. Roadrunner Records flew me to Sweden to interview Opeth in 2008 or so and they paid for the plane tickets, hotel, meals, etc.

I don't know much it happens any more. Record labels are almost as broke as magazines these days.

But that's the kind of thing I was interested in kicking around in here ... how does this happen? Is GQ somehow the last outlet that's rolling in dough? Is GHC paying most of the expenses himself cuz he was gonna be there to climb Mt. Hood anyway? Maybe it's all-expenses-paid by Modest Mouse's label/publicist?

All possibilities.

GHC's bio for Outside online, one of the sites for whom he writes about hiking and such, says "He and his little family are currently roaming the continent by Sprinter" van.

Anyone want to conjecture about the economics that allow GQ to (presumably) pay to send Gr*yson C*rrin to Portland for four days - across two different trips w/ flights and (I assume) lodging - to write a 13,000-word feature on Modest Mouse?

I don't know how it works in the US, but in the UK, record labels or management would always pay for flights/accomodation, not the magazine/site. I was being sent to the US from London every few weeks in the 00s when I was writing for Kerrang!, and being put up in v swanky hotels, etc - I know budgets are much, much, much lower now, but I'm imagining this trip cost less than transatlantic flights, etc, and 13,000 words in GQ would, I'm sure, be much more impactful for the campaign than the Kerrang! stuff I was doing. And pre-Covid, I was still being sent to the US on a fairly regular basis for MOJO; I haven't done it since then, but was offered a US trip late 2024 for a MOJO feature, so these trips are more rare, but still happen.

Grayson's a fantastic writer, and a really good dude, and his roaming lifestyle also possibly means he's making his way to these shows on his own steam. And that new MM record is a great listen, and I've not really been plugged into their stuff for a long time.

I remember reading lengthy features by Tom Junod in Vanity Fair in the 2000s where he'd go on tour with the Flaming Lips or hang out with Michael Stipe in LA for a week. He'll have been on a handsome retainer, while the record companies would have paid for the travel/accommodation, right? Either way, it seems a thing of the past. Not looked at VF in a long time - do they still do that kind of thing?

I don't tend to cover major label acts, and most interviews are done on Zoom these days, so I can only dream of the kind of press trips Stevie and colleagues had back in the day. I do get to go to some nice European festivals though, so can't complain.

The most ludicrous press junket I've been on was getting sent to the press launch of Montreux Jazz Festival in Feb. One night in a grand hotel, getting wined and dined in Claude Nobs' alpine chalet and admiring his collection of jukeboxes and terrible Ron Wood paintings. Watching his Great Danes galumphing through several feet of snow... The best bit was getting shown the archive and seeing the tapes of Miles Davis, Aretha et al pulled out. All this for a programme announcement preview!

The New Yorker used to publish and occasionally still does these kind of pieces. Esquire too.

All this for a programme announcement preview!

Forget it Jake, it's Montreux!

Ha!

But that's the kind of thing I was interested in kicking around in here ... how does this happen? Is GQ somehow the last outlet that's rolling in dough? Is GHC paying most of the expenses himself cuz he was gonna be there to climb Mt. Hood anyway? Maybe it's all-expenses-paid by Modest Mouse's label/publicist?

All possibilities.

flights from Denver to Portland aren't that expensive? Sounds like he stayed with Brock for at least a little bit

For the first time in many years, I have an assignment to profile a band for one of the remaining legacy media outlets that supports this practice. I don't like the genre the band is associated with, but I don't have to like the music to get along with the artists and learn something about what they do and how it is received.

The odd thing is that every time I ask my editor what the word count should be and when it is due, the editor won't answer. The last time I regularly did this kind of work, word count and deadline was inviolable. But then, 20 years ago, what I was doing was to produce copy so that a hole was filled in a print publication…it had to be just so, and they had to have it at this certain time. But this is probly going on the website, what's going to reach print is a distant concern, and how often do you read merely 150 words on any musical act now on any site? not very often. a 300 wd count may have been suitable for mags scared of the internet in 2003, but I'm up to 2000 at this point, and I don't think anyone's gonna say "you have to cut this, what the fuck do you think are doing???"

Lately I've had a couple of European outlets quote me a character count, and I've come back to them and said, effectively, WTF are you talking about? And they say, we do our layouts by character count, so this many characters is ~650 words. So fine. Start with that, please.

Is GQ somehow the last outlet that's rolling in dough? Is GHC paying most of the expenses himself cuz he was gonna be there to climb Mt. Hood anyway? Maybe it's all-expenses-paid by Modest Mouse's label/publicist?

All possibilities.

― alpine static, Wednesday, June 24, 2026 7:26 PM (yesterday)

conde nast is absolutely funding its publications w/ enough money to send writers on days long trips to far flung locations to write profiles. pitchfork sent a writer to france to do a cover story on oklou, VF and vogue will send a freelancer to anywhere it needs to for a cover story, and those two publications are spending high 5 figures or into 6 figures on cover stories still, tho most of that budget is for the photoshoot. the bustle group (owns nylon, W) sends freelancers on trips to do stories... i know this bcuz they sent my bf to mexico city to a reported feature on the gay nightlife scene there. billboard, hollywood reporter, variety send their writers all over the world to do cover stories... one of my friends who covers TV for one of those publications has been to europe several times to interview celebs. the amount of these kinds of stories and the budget for them has obviously dwindled over time -- and in most cases here (new yorker aside) we are talking about a story attached to a celebrity with a built in audience, as opposed to like travelogue or reported features -- but it's definitely much more common than your post would indicate

as for the question of how it's all funded, to your point "all possibilities" is the answer. publications are still paying the entire cost for stories it thinks are worth it ... i think if you're an EIC these days you look at your budget as being partly diverted to a small number of stories that you're willing to wholly fund yourself, w/ the rest of your budget going to the sort of piecing together strategy of working alongside labels/film studios/tv networks and the writers themselves to make stories happen. once you start getting into VF, vogue or other fashion world, you may get some advertorial type stuff happening w/ fashion brands to help foot the bill of the shoot. i think every freelancer i know thinks thru the lens of "i am already traveling to x place, is there a story i can do there and pitch to editors a, b, and c" because everyone knows that offering to do a story that requires travel w/o asking for the publication to take on 100% of the costs makes the pitch more attractive. in the case of GQ, the braintrust there clearly values these specific stories from haver currin (MJ lenderman, american football being two others) and my guess would be that the funding for each story has differed based on the importance of the subject involved. one easy tell w/ GQ is whether the photos were shot and styled in-house (as was the case w/ the lenderman story, but not the american football or brock ones)

I have a friend who is often doing (non-music) destination journalism pieces for GQ, Harpers, etc. Honestly I've been shocked at what they're still paying for some feature pieces, I didn't know there was still that kind of money left in the game.

others in this thread can prob speak to this more directly but i do think that w/ the UK specifically there was a pretty robust practice of labels flying writers from the UK to the USA to do interviews/profiles -- me and alfred met the lex in miami when he had been flown there to interview pitbull -- but i think that kinda thing has pretty much been wound down to zero between the proliferation of zoom and the ability to just find an american in nyc or LA to do the piece

I didn't know there was still that kind of money left in the game.

― Jordan s/t (Jordan), Thursday, June 25, 2026 5:50 PM (eight minutes ago)

conde nast took in $2 billion in revenue in 2025. obviously it's a withered husk of itself compared to how money was spent in the tina brown, graydon carter heyday (and who knows how much money they're actually making in profit) but the major publications owned by the big conglomerate organizations (penske etc) still have enough money to at least create the simulacrum of what magazines used to be

thanks for the insights, j0rdan (and everyone else)