QUOTE(Sickpup @ Feb 23 2008, 05:02 PM) [snapback]586822[/snapback]
QUOTE(brent_D @ Feb 23 2008, 06:56 PM) [snapback]586813[/snapback]
Right, but how do you explain the last few REM releases then? Aside from Uncut, they've received little love in reviews.
Music magazines have more then just the reviews to lure readers and fans too. The features hook the fans. For example, the new Spin has a good interview with Malkmus, but they're not into the record.
I certainly don't think Spin or Rolling Stone are in serious danger of losing readers by giving REM 3/5 or 2.5/5. Reviews matter so little these days, as the listener can sample so readily for free. PR agents want faces on the cover and nice photo spreads more than a high rated 200 word review.
It's not that they're in danger of losing subscribers over a bad review. It's the risk to newsstand sales, which can make a HUGE difference month to month.
I mean, a band like REM, which we'll say conservatively, at this point, has 2 million fans in the US, if even a small fraction, say 5% of them are both rabid and moved enough by the cover teaser to purchase the magazine at a cover price of $4.50, that's $450,000 in revenue.
not small change.
Magazines make little money from newsstand sales. It's all about getting subscriptions and ads. Trust me, I know how the world's largest newsstand operates (I used to work for them), and it's all about circulation, not physical sales. Dirty secret: Stealing the magazine counts the same as buying it.
QUOTE(TJENZ @ Feb 23 2008, 05:04 PM) [snapback]586823[/snapback]
QUOTE(Sickpup @ Feb 23 2008, 04:41 PM) [snapback]586798[/snapback]
And does anyone seriously believe what any of those major magazines say about big records anymore?
I'm convinced the editorial staff decides in advance what they're going to give the record (4.5 or 5 stars) and then just assigns it to the first writer who agrees that it lives up to that rating.
QUOTE
NEW YORK - The Black Crowes are lashing out at Maxim magazine for reviewing the bandâs new album â apparently without actually hearing it first.
The review, published in Maximâs March issue, gives the Crowesâ âWarpaintâ a rating of two-and-a-half stars out of five.
âThe writer â who has not heard the album since advance CDs were not made available â wrote what appears to be a disparaging assessment anyway, citing, âit hasnât left Chris Robinson and the gang much room for growth,ââ said a statement on the bandâs official Web site.
The bandâs manager, Pete Angelus, said the magazine explained that its review an âeducated guess.â
âIt speaks directly to the lack of the publicationâs credibility,â Angelus said in a statement. âIn my opinion, itâs a disgrace to the arts, journalism, critics, the publication itself and the public. Whatâs next â Maximâs concert reviews of shows they never attended, book reviews of books never read and film reviews of films never seen?â
A representative for the magazine would not confirm or deny to The Associated Press whether the writer actually listened to the album. Instead, Maxim released this statement in response: âMaxim will continue to provide our readers with information that is important to them, whether it is about fashion, lifestyle, technology, music, movies and more.â
âWarpaint,â the bandâs first album in seven years, is set for release March 4. The blues-rock group, fronted Chris Robinson, has released only one song from the disc, âGoodbye Daughters of the Revolution.â
Yeah, that's not a music magazine. The give like 5 records 3 sentence reviews. Besides, they're right.