To Link or not to link?

February 26, 2008

It all started on the website of indie rock tastemakers PitchforkMedia on October 2nd, 2006. Rather than giving any text, or even a proper rating, Ray Suzuki provided only an embedded video of a monkey urinating in its own mouth as his review of the latest album from the radio friendly stripped down version of the Rolling Stones we have all come to know as Jet. Had this happened anywhere else it might not have mattered, but Pitchfork have been trendsetters for years – they were champions early on of many bands that later exploded in popularity including The Shins and The Arcade Fire and, most recently, Vampire Weekend.

Recently the trend seems to be appearing even more frequently. One Pitchfork reviewer linked to this picture of Aloha sitting together in an airport in an attempt to explain the band scattered nature in a review of their new EP, Light Works.

Just this week, in a much more affective attempt at using multimedia to illustrate a point, another Pitchfork reviewer linked to this video of Dillinger Escape Plan frontman Greg Puciato using crowd members’ skulls like stepping stones in order to explain the violent and frantic nature of their live show.

This last example is a perfect example of just how it’s possible to use multimedia in music reviews to effectively prove a point without it distracting from the piece or otherwise being detrimental. Lets hope PFM continues with this trend of encouraginig writers to take risks.

One Response to “To Link or not to link?”

  1. Rick Hancock Says:

    Ah, your posts were okay. I think you could have punched them up a bit. A photo or two would have helped and embedding video directly into your blog is better than making your reader link to another site to see what you want them to check out.


Leave a Reply