Page 157 - Weiss, Jernej, ur./ed. 2024. Glasbena kritika – nekoč in danes ▪︎ Music Criticism – Yesterday and Today. Koper/Ljubljana: Založba Univerze na Primorskem in Festival Ljubljana. Studia musicologica Labacensia, 7
P. 157
music criticism in ireland
Currently there is effectively only one person covering the classical area.
Reviewers get free tickets to the event or a free copy of an album, yet no ex-
penses are paid. Hence usually only concerts in places with a resident Gold-
enPlec contributor can be reviewed (although the classical editor admitted
to covering his expenses on occasion himself in order to attend a perfor-
mance in another city). New reviewers are invited on the webpage to come
forward, yet at least in the classical area this happens quite rarely.
Generally Goldenplec provides interesting, high-quality reviews. They
have not fallen into the trap that Doug Freeman saw emerging in 2008:
The ease of online publication and race to post stories first has produced
a snap-judgment journalism that increasingly undermines reflection,
analysis, and sometimes even simple facts. [...] The other issue of integ-
rity of reviews in relation to industry affiliations, advertising, and spon-
sored events is somewhat more problematic. For many blogs, where one
person or a small team handles all aspects of the site and beyond, the di-
vision between editorial and business functions is blurred.40
Yet the reason this trap could be avoided is that GoldenPlec doesn’t
have a business function; it is mainly run by and for enthusiasts. No one is
making money with it. This includes the reviewers – they are prime exam-
ples of one of Tim Page’s main concerns regarding music criticism today:
“Worst of all, almost nobody gets paid.”41 Generally, people expect inter-
net content to be free (with the exception of online shopping, of course),
and most would not frequent an online music journal if they had to pay
for it. Large companies such as Google or Meta can make their money
through advertising and the marketing of their user data, yet small pages
like GoldenPlec can at most get a few ads, which won’t generate significant
income. Does this mean one can only run a local music criticism journal
as an enthusiast, provided one finds enough co-enthusiasts who contrib-
ute to it for free in their spare time? The jury is out on this, yet the dan-
ger is certainly there.
The feedback sections of online shops such as Amazon and even more
so social media provide another, if unstructured, competition for formal
music criticism. Most of us probably check the feedback left below items
40 Doug Freeman, “Online Integrity: Music Criticism 2.0,” The Austin Chronicle, April
11, 2008, https://www.austinchronicle.com/daily/music/2008-04-11/611521/.
41 Tim Page, “In Memory of the Critic’s Trade,” 21CM, De Pauw University, Septem-
ber 12, 2019, https://web.archive.org/web/20200923072319/http://21cm.org/magazi-
ne/state-of-the-art-form/2019/09/12/in-memory-of-the-critics-trade/.
157
Currently there is effectively only one person covering the classical area.
Reviewers get free tickets to the event or a free copy of an album, yet no ex-
penses are paid. Hence usually only concerts in places with a resident Gold-
enPlec contributor can be reviewed (although the classical editor admitted
to covering his expenses on occasion himself in order to attend a perfor-
mance in another city). New reviewers are invited on the webpage to come
forward, yet at least in the classical area this happens quite rarely.
Generally Goldenplec provides interesting, high-quality reviews. They
have not fallen into the trap that Doug Freeman saw emerging in 2008:
The ease of online publication and race to post stories first has produced
a snap-judgment journalism that increasingly undermines reflection,
analysis, and sometimes even simple facts. [...] The other issue of integ-
rity of reviews in relation to industry affiliations, advertising, and spon-
sored events is somewhat more problematic. For many blogs, where one
person or a small team handles all aspects of the site and beyond, the di-
vision between editorial and business functions is blurred.40
Yet the reason this trap could be avoided is that GoldenPlec doesn’t
have a business function; it is mainly run by and for enthusiasts. No one is
making money with it. This includes the reviewers – they are prime exam-
ples of one of Tim Page’s main concerns regarding music criticism today:
“Worst of all, almost nobody gets paid.”41 Generally, people expect inter-
net content to be free (with the exception of online shopping, of course),
and most would not frequent an online music journal if they had to pay
for it. Large companies such as Google or Meta can make their money
through advertising and the marketing of their user data, yet small pages
like GoldenPlec can at most get a few ads, which won’t generate significant
income. Does this mean one can only run a local music criticism journal
as an enthusiast, provided one finds enough co-enthusiasts who contrib-
ute to it for free in their spare time? The jury is out on this, yet the dan-
ger is certainly there.
The feedback sections of online shops such as Amazon and even more
so social media provide another, if unstructured, competition for formal
music criticism. Most of us probably check the feedback left below items
40 Doug Freeman, “Online Integrity: Music Criticism 2.0,” The Austin Chronicle, April
11, 2008, https://www.austinchronicle.com/daily/music/2008-04-11/611521/.
41 Tim Page, “In Memory of the Critic’s Trade,” 21CM, De Pauw University, Septem-
ber 12, 2019, https://web.archive.org/web/20200923072319/http://21cm.org/magazi-
ne/state-of-the-art-form/2019/09/12/in-memory-of-the-critics-trade/.
157
