I had a blog post with
the headline "From music to movies... to books!" in mind
for a few weeks now, in honour of my very first book review and what
has come with it, but I usually have to wait with my blog posts until
the corresponding review has been published, and that naturally takes
some time in the world of print media. And while I have to wait with the publication of a blog post of mine, the world keeps turning. And, sometimes, the
original focus of a blog post may change, due to what is happening in
the world in the meantime. This is the case right now with this very
blog post.
Originally, I wanted to
write about my very first book review, the content of the reviewed
book and how that book also played a role in my private life. Not to
mention the pleasant news that I have extended my field of activity
during the past few months, from mere music journalism to broader
cultural topics such as movies and books. A change that is not only
pleasant but was also long overdue.
Now, I'm going to
postpone everything regarding the book (and reading overall), in
order to broach the issue of the pleasant news which became even more
pleasant as of today.
What happened?
Well, today, I stumbled on an
article about the singer of an American band who allegedly insulted
an American online magazine with very vulgar words. The cause for the
conflict was the release of an album by the band almost twenty years
ago; the album was rated rather low by the online magazine back then.
Now, almost twenty years later, there is a re-release of the album.
For this reason, the album was reviewed again by the aforementioned
online magazine - but this time, the rating is very favourable.
I want to emphasise
that the singer allegedly (!) insulted the online magazine with very
vulgar words and
that the singer allegedly (!) accused the online magazine of
hypocrisy (After the first review was published, the album turned out
to be a huge commercial success) since I could not find any source
that backs up the content of the article I stumbled on today. So,
either the whole story is made up or the singer has removed the
corresponding source from the world wide web in the meantime - which
seems to be common practice nowadays, especially for those who type first and
think later. In any case: Stuff like this happens. All the time. It
has happened to me, too. And what I always do in such cases: I just move
on.
As a music journalist, you have a gigantic selection of music,
bands and events that you could write about. If you or your work is
dissed because a musician or the organiser of an event cannot deal
with criticism or - even worse - believes that everything he / she
does is always worth at least 10/10 and never "just" 9/10,
you as a music journalist realise in this very moment that you just
dedicated your time, your work and also the space on the website or
in the print magazine to the wrong band / wrong event. All of this
should have been dedicated to another band / another event. A waste
has taken place. A waste of time, work and space. Personally, I
consider it as the best solution to just move on in such cases. The
waste has taken place already and, unfortunately, it cannot be
reversed - but from that moment onwards, one can make sure to not
waste another second on this band / this event in the future. This is
how I deal with such cases, and this practice is only applied in
cases of insults and not in cases where someone may be dissatisfied
with something. The latter are usually mature and professional enough
to ask questions.
But back to the
American singer. If the defamation really took place, it tells a lot
about the singer himself - in a not so positive way. And the older
you are, the more embarrassing is such an immature - not to say
childish - behaviour (In this specific case, we talk about a man in
his fifties). However, it's not the part with the alleged defamation that makes me write this blog post; it's the part with the two
reviews which were published by the online magazine.
The same album,
reviewed by the same online magazine. Once with a low rating and once
with a high rating. In between: Almost 20 years. Obvious die-hard
fans of the band post their "discovery" of these two
contrary reviews by the same online magazine on Instagram and the
like, either accusing the online magazine of hypocrisy or claiming
that time had turned the album into a classic, while putting in their
two cents here and there without thinking. The most logical context
here does not seem to cross their minds: It's the question of the
person who wrote the review. And guess what: It's not the same person
behind these two reviews. There are two reviews on the same album
published by the same online magazine, written by two different
persons. Judging from a facebook
post on this topic, only 3 out of 122 commentators seem to understand
this fact.
As
if that wasn't sad enough: Even if both reviews had been written at
the same time, there could have been differences in the evaluation,
because a review reflects the opinion of the respective reviewer and
not the opinion of an entire editorial office. One would think that
such contexts would be a question of common sense, but apparently
it's not the case. And let's assume that both reviews would have been
written by the same person: There are nearly two decades between
these two reviews. Who does not develop in the course of such a long
time?
Maybe this is the usual
social media madness where people push the buttons of their
smartphones faster than they think. If they think at all. And maybe
the fan base of this band is not as dumb as it seems at first sight.
The smarter part of the fan base may have better things to do
than to hang around on facebook, Instagram and the like, sending
inconsiderate nonsense into the world wide web (and is therefore
invisible). Apart from that: If the second review had turned out
as negative as the first one, wouldn't the clamour
have been just as loud as it is now? Nagging for the sake of nagging?
At least the singer should be aware of the respective contexts, should
the alleged defamation be true. However, there is also the possibility
that this whole thing might have been hyped: Attention for the band,
their brand new album and all the re-releases which are to come in
the course of this year, plus attention for the magazine. Maybe,
maybe.
The reason why all this
turns the extension of my field of activity into an even more
pleasant news should be obvious: I no longer have to deal with such a
kindergarten. Not even while working.
To be continued...
![Stefanie Singh [Sound Kitchen]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ATF3xaj7OxA/U-flHWZ-51I/AAAAAAAAA3U/SBEsfSHKQlA/s1600/BlogspotBannerBlueberry2014.jpg)
