Those script writers at Veronica Mars sure know how to keep the cool kids tuned in. Having Paul Rudd turn up as a booze-soaked rock has-been was one thing, but this week they went straight for the indie rock jugular. Reader Rebecca S. provides the transcript:
PIZ: So, I have news. I got offered an internship with Pitchfork Media. Pretty much the most highly regarded music review publication on the Internet.VERONICA: Piz, that’s fantastic!
PIZ: Yeah, I get to work with the most important critics in the business, see bands when they’re on the verge of breaking. Might even get to do a few reviews myself, so I can really get my snob on. Their offices are in New York … which could be cool, right?
VERONICA: Super cool, you lucky dog!
PIZ: Twelve weeks in the Big Apple.
As reader Travis tells us, Piz ultimately turns down the internship. Which was a wise decision ’cause he was sorta heading to the wrong city. Unless a Pitchfork internship these days means doing Ryan Schreiber’s dishes in Brooklyn.
UPDATE: Looks like the dishwashing worked.
 |
 |
“Pretty much the most highly regarded music review publication on the Internet.”
That’s disturbing.
That made me laugh.
Couldn’t even get the city right.
http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/record_review/42664-skert
I think the original script must have said “see bands ONLY UNTIL the’re on the verge of breaking” And I really don’t get how someone could mention pitchfork’s critics and not call chris ott an asshole. It’s just unrealistic dialogue.
Good grief, will people please stop reading those shitheads and giving them so much credit? Fuck, it pisses me off when retards get such adoration. There are far more interesting and intelligent music blogs out there.
Pitchfork is a joke.
Oh, dannygutters. I’m so glad I’m not the only one for whom Pitchfork and that flaming d-bag Chris Ott are synonymous.
And really, Veronica Mars, I thought you were above this. Leave the awkward, ironicasual name-dropping to reruns of the Gilmore Girls.
probably couldn’t say the real city because of clearances… often happens in tv/film
And yet they could say the name of the website? Makes no sense at all.
All those against pitchfork, why? They’re definitely this generations Rolling Stone. Yes there’s better blogs out there to read about more niche indie music, but pitchfork isn’t a blog. Pitchfork is a music publication and whether or not you agree with some of their album reviews- they have had some pretty amazing features and exclusive interviews. What other publications offer such a cohesive source of news for all things (good) independent music?
“All those against pitchfork, why? They’re definitely this generations Rolling Stone.”
Way to answer your own question. And in record time!
d-
Allow me. People hate on Pitchfork because
A) their reviewers seem to use their review space as a workshop for their creative writing masterpieces — writing about everything except the music in a maddening, pretentious, unreadable mess.
B) They seem to take delicious pleasure in overhyping promising but relatively immature bands, then overreacting with astounding low scores when they’re inevitably unable to live to the hype. It’s like they get off on proving themselves as tastemakers. CYHSY is the biggest current example, but my disgust started with watching their horrendous treatment of …And You Will Know Us by the Trail of Dead. Looking over the review archives, you’ll find a lot of 8.5+ reviews of a band, followed up by 5.0- reviews of their follow-up album.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHA
Steve, you have perfectly summed up the reasons I dislike Pitchfork. You really hit the nail on the head. Bravo!
Definitely agree with A, but usually this can be avoided by simply skipping the first paragraph of one of their reviews to get to the actual review.
As for hyping a bands album up by giving it a good review and then in the future giving it a lower score. I don’t think it’s always within pitchforks power or their fault for a bands sophmore slump or eventual degradation of quality output. They didn’t pan Arcade Fire after their initial good review of Funeral- because surprise surprise their output quality didn’t diminish. CYSY second album was fairly unremarkable and thus hype was hushed around them and their corresponding reviews…
>>And I really don’t get how someone could mention pitchfork’s critics and not call chris ott an asshole.
The last time Ott had something on Pitchfork, this show didn’t exist.
you guys are all overlooking the best line in Piz’s schpiel… it was something like “maybe i’ll even get to review a couple CD’s myself.. so i can really get my snob on”
i fucking love veronica mars…
and in terms of “ironicasual” name drops on teen-targeted shows, this was nothing compared to degrassi’s “kind of a mixture of neutral milk hotel and death cab for cutie”
Now you’ve done it. It was just announced that Veronica Mars has been canceled.
I blame you.
DwD
Damn, sorry Dunphy.
probably couldn’t say the real city because of clearances… often happens in tv/film
yeah, you have to pay Sufjan Stevens royalties every time you say “Chicago” on television. The whole broadcast industry was practically ruined when the Bears made the playoffs.
Pitchfork’s record reviews are usually pretty hard to read. But for the most part, I think they’re nearly bang-on with their scores. Everytime they get excited about a record, it usually is pretty fucking good (I actually can’t think of an example refuting this) and they are reliable for introducing good music that I would normally never here of. And although there are some records that I still like but got low scores on the site, I’m not going to get my panties up in a bunch about it. Let’s not forget that just because one reviewer bashes an album, does not mean the rest of the writers hate it too (think of the initial review of Basement Jaxx – Rooty, and then how it was on the 2000-2004 list). Also, their news is great, their feature writing is decent to pretty good, and the fact that they constantly post videos and songs makes them a damn fine music site. If you disagree with their opinions on music, that’s fine, but if you start to bash the site on blogs it means that you are either trying to be cool by running against the grain, or you have had your feelings hurt by a bad review of a record(s) you love.
I consider myself to have pretty good taste, but I swear I did not understand what they reviewers were hearing when they hyped these records:
Tapes ‘n’ Tapes – The Loon
Liars – Drum’s Not Dead
Menomena – Friend and Foe
Fennesz – Endless Summer
Deerhunter – Cryptograms
Sometimes I just shake my head and wonder, are they just trying to see how much influence they have in the industry, or do they genuinely hear something incredible in these records? Because honestly I don’t. And I know a lot of other people who don’t either. Some of their picks for ‘Best New Music’ just baffle me.
Wow. That’s some venom. I thought the note was funny, but the remarks are just plain hateful. Yep, Pitchfork is overwrought at times. Yep, the writers of Veronica Mars (who on every other day of the week are right on time) got this one wrong. But I think it’s ironic that Pitchfork, a website often criticized for turning its back on musicians once they start selling records, has more haters now that it has become an honest-to-God force in media than ever before. I still get turned on to some good music by Pitchfork, and I’m glad to see that people who think about music are getting exposure. Please get over yourselves.
Get over yourselves indeed.
I don’t read the ‘fork on a regular basis, but ever since its brand name started to get on the mainstream radar the most annoying thing has been seeing other music zines/indie bloggers get progressively snarky as a way to solidify their “true” cred (lookin’ @ you Stylus, Slant).
As a result, I find myself liking Pitchfork for its mostly positive, self-deprecating news items and gushy fanboy interviews than anyone else.
[And if you want overwritten reviews, go to Cokemachineglow -- oh how I luv them.]
yeah yeah pitchfork tends to get worked into a lather over the littlest things but paula’s totally right. they have a lot of good content beyond their overwrought reviews. that bjork exclusive before volta came out (and they panned it) was great. what a coup!
Pitchfork and Sterogum both suck. nothing but indie fucking cocksuckers who think their opinion is actually worth something. except for me
I think everyone missed the point. The joke was poking a little fun at P4K. From the “most important rag” down to the “12 weeks in NYC” it was all a tongue in cheek thing. Rob Thomas is not dumb enough to make such an obvious name drop and then fuck up the city. If you’ve watched a few episodes you know this, th guy is sly when referencing. great joke (real early in the ep) to followup the previous ep’s focus on indie rock fictional superstar (happened to be this last season’s best ep for what it is worth)
who the fuck is veronica mars?
You would need to spend an evening sifting through the archives to find it, but somewhere online, in 2004, I predicted upon leaving the site that Pitchfork would be mentioned in a major network sitcom in 2007. I guess I was wrong.
This tie-in is a strange, awkward decision that benefits no one; it’s totally inconsequential, and won’t be remembered by next week.
Yet it’s very difficult to understand how they can bray dark horse – trumpeting readership to mainstream advertisers, slamming print mags, pissing on Microsoft’s branding overtures for the Zune – so publicly and confidently, then, under cloak of embarrassment, silently siphon off a review to a Time Warner property, to assist in some half-baked teen soap opera’s transubstantiation.
A real business strategy, guys – any time you’re ready.