Once upon a time, when there was no internet and the only radio stations who played adventurous new music were far and few between, we relied on music critics to expose us to music. Often I would buy music on the strength of a review, having never heard a note.
Sadly the role of the music critic has diminished. This happened for various reasons. Shortened attention spans in a fast paced age led to publications like the now defunct, Blender and their two paragraph reviews. Hey look, we have 35 reviews in this issue. Rolling Stone soon followed suit. Gone were the days of rambling, yet extremely entertaining and enlightening reviews by the like of Lester Bangs or the theses of Robert Christgau (the man responsible for starting the Village Voice Pazz and Jop Poll discussed in my previous entry).
The slow demise of the printed media is also responsible. Decreased ad revenue leads to fewer pages in a magazine and less room for reviews.
Music criticism has moved online. There's countless bloggers weighing in on artists. (Personally, I try not to review. I don't see myself a critic so much as a promoter.) One online site towers over all the rest these days. It is the Chicago based Pitchfork.
I'm a member of a few music based message boards on the internet. It's a great way to be involved in a community that shares your interests. I've got plenty of friends but not too many share my music fanaticism. These message boards are full of like-minded music freaks. It feels like home.
So last week a thread on one of these boards began to ask why there was such a similarity between what Pitchfork called the best music of 2009 and the poll results in the Pazz And Jop survey. Soon writers and even the editor of Pitchfork began weighing in on the topic, making for interesting reading. Here's the story with links from The Daily Swarm.