Comments on: Who killed the critics? http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/ by Jeff Jarvis Sun, 07 Sep 2008 01:04:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » Media on media http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/#comment-372746 BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » Media on media Sat, 05 Apr 2008 13:44:03 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1442#comment-372746 [...] my April 2006 column playing taps for critics. Here’s David Carr’s NY Times piece on the trend, which essentially gives voice to [...] [...] my April 2006 column playing taps for critics. Here’s David Carr’s NY Times piece on the trend, which essentially gives voice to [...]

]]> By: P.Radhakrishna http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/#comment-244350 P.Radhakrishna Thu, 21 Dec 2006 14:27:49 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1442#comment-244350 audience feedback would become vital in the sense -there is space for sharing offtrack opinions or views as well as unpopular views which may not get any space in print media. also there is need to know if there is someone in the world thinking on samelines or unlike the author. catalysts -opinion makers can always change the tide in favor or against some direction of news makers, leaders of different sections. audience feedback would become vital in the sense -there is space for sharing offtrack opinions or views as well as unpopular views which may not get any space in print media.

also there is need to know if there is someone in the world thinking on samelines or unlike the author.
catalysts -opinion makers can always change the tide in favor or against some direction of news makers, leaders of different sections.

]]> By: Legally Brunette » Blog Archive » film critics? we don’t need no stinkin’ film critics http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/#comment-111259 Legally Brunette » Blog Archive » film critics? we don’t need no stinkin’ film critics Tue, 15 Aug 2006 20:11:49 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1442#comment-111259 [...] “Old-school critics get little sympathy from their Internet brethren. In a post called “Who Killed the Critics” , Jeff Jarvis writes that the days of a handful of self-appointed experts deciding what will get a thumbs up and what will not are over. [...] [...] “Old-school critics get little sympathy from their Internet brethren. In a post called “Who Killed the Critics” , Jeff Jarvis writes that the days of a handful of self-appointed experts deciding what will get a thumbs up and what will not are over. [...]

]]> By: Kathryn http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/#comment-45121 Kathryn Tue, 09 May 2006 04:06:46 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1442#comment-45121 I like your idea about Entertainment Weekly, and allowing readers to express their own opinions in an online setting. It’s true that everyone is a critic. In fact, I believe that everyone always has been a critic, but now-a-days the internet allows people to speak their opinions to a larger audience. This fact has perhaps changed the role of the professional critics by adding competition. I do read online reviews at websites such as imdb.com and amazon.com; however, in my mind these do not replace professionally written reviews. One reason for this is writing quality. The other, is that I have more trust in the factual accuracy of a professional critic writing for a paper or magazine, than I do in a non-professional writer on the internet. Allowing anyone and everyone to voice their own opinions is great, but still no replacement for a professionally written review. I like your idea about Entertainment Weekly, and allowing readers to express their own opinions in an online setting. It’s true that everyone is a critic. In fact, I believe that everyone always has been a critic, but now-a-days the internet allows people to speak their opinions to a larger audience. This fact has perhaps changed the role of the professional critics by adding competition. I do read online reviews at websites such as imdb.com and amazon.com; however, in my mind these do not replace professionally written reviews. One reason for this is writing quality. The other, is that I have more trust in the factual accuracy of a professional critic writing for a paper or magazine, than I do in a non-professional writer on the internet. Allowing anyone and everyone to voice their own opinions is great, but still no replacement for a professionally written review.

]]> By: BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » Who killed the critics? (continued) http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/#comment-43412 BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » Who killed the critics? (continued) Tue, 02 May 2006 08:03:40 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1442#comment-43412 [...] Continuing discussion on the shrinking world of the professional critic: In WBUR’s blog, Bill Marx writes: Some critics think that their opinions, grounded in expertise and taste, is what makes them valuable. Now that the Internet lets readers sample written judgments from around the world, that position is becoming increasingly precarious. Still, many established reviewers don’t feel intimidated by the musings of the “cyber-rabble.” In “Time,” film critic Richard Corliss wrote that “the web is where traditional criticism is democratized….You don’t need experience, insight or a spell-check function … just passion and a lot of spare time.” [...] [...] Continuing discussion on the shrinking world of the professional critic: In WBUR’s blog, Bill Marx writes: Some critics think that their opinions, grounded in expertise and taste, is what makes them valuable. Now that the Internet lets readers sample written judgments from around the world, that position is becoming increasingly precarious. Still, many established reviewers don’t feel intimidated by the musings of the “cyber-rabble.” In “Time,” film critic Richard Corliss wrote that “the web is where traditional criticism is democratized….You don’t need experience, insight or a spell-check function … just passion and a lot of spare time.” [...]

]]> By: Attitude - WBUR’s Arts Blog » Blog Archive » Critics In Danger http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/#comment-43251 Attitude - WBUR’s Arts Blog » Blog Archive » Critics In Danger Mon, 01 May 2006 17:59:14 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1442#comment-43251 [...] In a recent column, Jeff Jarvis argues that arts critics were on their way out in mainsteam media. Who needs them, given the hundreds of review blogs online. I have posted a recent column below, which makes the same point. If criticism is to survive in the media, than most reviewers must become much better than they are — critics who don’t write well and think in provocative ways are finished. [...] [...] In a recent column, Jeff Jarvis argues that arts critics were on their way out in mainsteam media. Who needs them, given the hundreds of review blogs online. I have posted a recent column below, which makes the same point. If criticism is to survive in the media, than most reviewers must become much better than they are — critics who don’t write well and think in provocative ways are finished. [...]

]]> By: T. http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/#comment-43008 T. Sun, 30 Apr 2006 19:25:28 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1442#comment-43008 Part of the problem, to me, is that too often the major magazines act as sounding boards for the publicists to the point you can barely trust the neutrality of anything you read, and the critics seem less trustworthy in their opinions as well. I often find blogs to have better commentary and analysis and neutrality anyway, plus they're often better-written without needing to be politically correct, so it makes sense they'd start taking precedence over critics. <a href="http://johnnytriangles.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">Johnny Triangles</a> Part of the problem, to me, is that too often the major magazines act as sounding boards for the publicists to the point you can barely trust the neutrality of anything you read, and the critics seem less trustworthy in their opinions as well. I often find blogs to have better commentary and analysis and neutrality anyway, plus they’re often better-written without needing to be politically correct, so it makes sense they’d start taking precedence over critics.

Johnny Triangles

]]> By: Vermont Neighbor http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/#comment-42979 Vermont Neighbor Sun, 30 Apr 2006 16:43:39 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1442#comment-42979 Critics are similar to bloggers. If you find an interesting voice, you'll stick with it. I've been reading Rex Reed for years, and while I don't agree with his politics it's like checking in with an old friend. Also, he writes the best reviews on flops and disasters. Critics are similar to bloggers. If you find an interesting voice, you’ll stick with it. I’ve been reading Rex Reed for years, and while I don’t agree with his politics it’s like checking in with an old friend. Also, he writes the best reviews on flops and disasters.

]]> By: Robert Feinman http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/#comment-42938 Robert Feinman Sun, 30 Apr 2006 13:26:43 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1442#comment-42938 Perhaps its because most newspaper and TV critics get co-opted by the industry they cover. If you are going to really pan films on a regular basis you will not be invited to be part of the inner circle. Most "reviews" are just PR for the film and the stars aided by handouts from the studios and arranged interviews. This isn't reviewing it shilling. The only person who could consistently pan the majority of things he wrote about was theater critic John Simon. Perhaps its because most newspaper and TV critics get co-opted by the industry they cover. If you are going to really pan films on a regular basis you will not be invited to be part of the inner circle.
Most “reviews” are just PR for the film and the stars aided by handouts from the studios and arranged interviews. This isn’t reviewing it shilling.

The only person who could consistently pan the majority of things he wrote about was theater critic John Simon.

]]> By: Jim Treacher http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/#comment-42892 Jim Treacher Sun, 30 Apr 2006 11:12:58 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1442#comment-42892 I like the idea, but <i>Entertainment Whenever</i> sounds a little lackluster. "You want to read about entertainment? Okay, we'll get around to it... whenever." I like the idea, but Entertainment Whenever sounds a little lackluster. “You want to read about entertainment? Okay, we’ll get around to it… whenever.”

]]> By: Dirk Deppey http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/#comment-42819 Dirk Deppey Sun, 30 Apr 2006 07:07:25 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1442#comment-42819 Hi there; my name's Dirk Deppey, and I'm the Managing Editor of <i>The Comics Journal</i>, a trade magazine and literary review for comics and graphic novels. I used to write <a href="http://www.tcj.com/journalista/" rel="nofollow">the magazine's weblog</a> before taking over the print side of things, and have long been aware that the web had empowered some fresh and interesting voices on subjects that we once had little competition in covering. Since I assumed my current job two years ago, we've reached out to comics-oriented webloggers whose opinions we found interesting and asked them to write criticism and columns for us. It hasn't always worked out -- a few of the people whom we've commissioned to write have found themselves suffering from one flavor of stagefright or other when writing for us in print -- but it's brought in several new voices that have helped diversify the magazine tremendously. The web doesn't have to be some strange and unknowable competition for print; it can also be a fertile breeding ground for exactly the sort of writers editors need to keep things fresh. Hi there; my name’s Dirk Deppey, and I’m the Managing Editor of The Comics Journal, a trade magazine and literary review for comics and graphic novels. I used to write the magazine’s weblog before taking over the print side of things, and have long been aware that the web had empowered some fresh and interesting voices on subjects that we once had little competition in covering. Since I assumed my current job two years ago, we’ve reached out to comics-oriented webloggers whose opinions we found interesting and asked them to write criticism and columns for us. It hasn’t always worked out — a few of the people whom we’ve commissioned to write have found themselves suffering from one flavor of stagefright or other when writing for us in print — but it’s brought in several new voices that have helped diversify the magazine tremendously. The web doesn’t have to be some strange and unknowable competition for print; it can also be a fertile breeding ground for exactly the sort of writers editors need to keep things fresh.

]]> By: aslfan http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/#comment-42778 aslfan Sun, 30 Apr 2006 04:32:20 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1442#comment-42778 that old dude ..Roger Ebert. why don't he get out of his newspaper and tv shows and start his own . get rid of that roper guy. that old dude ..Roger Ebert. why don’t he get out of his newspaper
and tv shows and start his own . get rid of that roper guy.

]]> By: Jennifer http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/#comment-42759 Jennifer Sun, 30 Apr 2006 03:14:10 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1442#comment-42759 Really? When you're looking for a good book to read, you consult Amazon's legions over the New Yorker? A truly fine reviewer -- including those employed by big newspapers and other major periodicals -- provides information the masses can't. Even your friends generally can't capture that essence that the best reviewers convey. I don't necessarily consult reviewers for their opinions, per se, but for their characterizations, a fine point that helps me know whether a book/movie/play/whatever is likely to be what i'm looking for intellectually, emotionally, tonally, etc. Sure, I've got more sources (bloggers and such) for that now. But I still have to find the ones I trust; I don't have time to read them all. The imprimatur of the L.A. Times isn't likely to stop mattering to me. Really? When you’re looking for a good book to read, you consult Amazon’s legions over the New Yorker?

A truly fine reviewer — including those employed by big newspapers and other major periodicals — provides information the masses can’t. Even your friends generally can’t capture that essence that the best reviewers convey. I don’t necessarily consult reviewers for their opinions, per se, but for their characterizations, a fine point that helps me know whether a book/movie/play/whatever is likely to be what i’m looking for intellectually, emotionally, tonally, etc.

Sure, I’ve got more sources (bloggers and such) for that now. But I still have to find the ones I trust; I don’t have time to read them all. The imprimatur of the L.A. Times isn’t likely to stop mattering to me.

]]> By: Chris Thilk http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/04/29/who-killed-the-critics/#comment-42742 Chris Thilk Sun, 30 Apr 2006 02:22:02 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=1442#comment-42742 First off, I really like your idea for how you'd start EW now. I was among the charter subscribers and liked what it was but the world now is different. The problem is I don't think magazine publishers realize that. As far as the critics mattering in decision making, I do think there's still a place for the "professional" critic. The problem right now is that they have walled themselves off from the rest of the community so efficiently that they've only succeeded in marginalizing themselves. If critics were to take down those walls, start hyperlinking in their online posting to others and join the conversation that's happening around - and right now without - them, they'd have at least as much voice as anyone else. But by maintaining the attitude that they're the only opinion that counts they've failed to evolve, a move that will be their downfall. First off, I really like your idea for how you’d start EW now. I was among the charter subscribers and liked what it was but the world now is different. The problem is I don’t think magazine publishers realize that.

As far as the critics mattering in decision making, I do think there’s still a place for the “professional” critic. The problem right now is that they have walled themselves off from the rest of the community so efficiently that they’ve only succeeded in marginalizing themselves. If critics were to take down those walls, start hyperlinking in their online posting to others and join the conversation that’s happening around - and right now without - them, they’d have at least as much voice as anyone else. But by maintaining the attitude that they’re the only opinion that counts they’ve failed to evolve, a move that will be their downfall.

]]>