Well you don't be biased and just judge it on the music. It's not hard

The person being a piece of s*** or a brilliant humanitarian shouldn't make a difference when you choose to review something- you just have to base it on the art alone.

yes you are correct but they also have more time to go through a record and deconstruct cause its their job to

honestly reviewers should be used for

A. if record gets good critical reception 95% time its bound to be decent if even your not as crazy as the reviewers ie Fetch The Bolt Cutters

B. Reviewers also have more time in their hands to hear more music which means they more likely to find someone you never ever heard before which is great for majority of population which don't wanna go though RYM or Bandcamp databases to find a new record

C. The perspective that criticizing art helps refine our understanding of it. Which means critics in all forms of art try to look at it as objectively as possible to see where it succeeds and fails. Hopefully they also would place it in context with previous works in the genre or by the same artist. Anyone interested in arts worthwhile endeavor because it helps us understand the art criticized.

Music, Books, Movies, Video Games, Television needs to be critiqued as said above it doesn't matter if you making money or not

so wrong.

you cannot separate what you know about an artist from the music.

this is why artists pay such close attention to their image.

for example if I know an artist is a rapist I can’t hear their sexual come ons in music the same as another artist.

if I know an artist ran from lil uzi in a starbucks I can’t hear them talk tough guy s*** the same.

"You don't be biased and just judge it on the music"? Wtf are you talking about man? Have you ever read a review?

What a weird oversimplification. You're completely ignoring the reality that who an artist is is a usually an important factor in their music and needs to be considered when judging it

Dn

this post is corny my guy

how jason whitlock actually played D1 always baffles me

I'm sorry, I AM LOVE, can you explain

Also where's ya avi dawg

it's the readers, whether they're for or against them, that give reviewers/journalists their power so take it up with them

Reviewers are fine when they aren't showing clear bias.

A reviewer's job is to be unbiased in their review of a person's work. When people let their personal feelings on said Artist reflect on the review thats when they become corny. IE the guy who reviewed MOTM III

He knew what he was doing, there was evidence of the bias, he purposely baited people in with his review being needlessly disrespectful while critiquing it. All while knowing that normally reviewing the album wouldn't get him nearly as much attention.

Anthony Fantano does similar s*** being extra about certain albums for the reaction factor and he doesn't even try to hide it now.

With that being said opinions are just that end of the day, everyone is entitled to their own. People who get mad at other people's genuine opinions are silly.

That's exactly why reviews are complete and utter bullshit and thus, inaccurate.

You could be the absolute worst person in the world.... And if you drop an album like BAD, or MBDTF or TPAB etc.... You still deserve a 10/10 rating.

If you're judging a product your personal thoughts on the actual artist are irrelevant- that's if you want the review to have any relevance anyway

Reviewers mostly aren’t corny. They only become corny when their write-ups are corny and are trying too hard to appeal to ktt /Twitter humor, memes, narratives, etc.

For example: Alphonse Pierre type reviewers

Besides that, they’re getting paid to talk about music. That’s a huge W if I’ve ever seen one

So If I shat in every DoorDash order and texted every customer scat p*** would that be okay cause I’m just doing my job?

Reviewers. Negative reviews is what gets clicks and subscriptions and they know it.

Nothing wrong with getting upset over a reviewer that tears down art in some contrived, uninformed way

Music criticism tends to be weaker than something like film criticism tbh

Nothing is true everything is permitted

Reviewers get paid for their opinion

Barely

You sound like you’ve been hurt by a review before brother

I agree that good music deserves positive reviews, but how are you still confused about the fact that some reviews demand mentioning the artist’s actions?

A reviewer is basically one persons view point on a soapbox

And y’all get upset at what other people say on here daily

It’s kinda sad really

Do you think all reviewers make negative clickbait reviews tho? What about good reviewers/publications?

I mean, if a review is tearing an album down in a "contrived and uninformed way" then yeah that's fair, but I feel like that happens less often than fans think.

Also wym music criticism is "weaker" than film criticism?