Quote:
Originally Posted by audiot servant
Tim, It's probably fair to say that the struggle to develop a practical business model for media in the new world of internet publishing has been an expensive one. Clearly an early causality has been the variable quality. It's not that there isn't enthusiasm among the new breed of reviewers but truth is it takes time and mentoring to foster good journalism. Without a traditional model to keep it tested and true and to ensure compliance with deeper values we risk losing faith in what is written. In the old days the guild taught the value of truth and brought perspective to the word. That transparency and ethics are the greatest asset any writer can have is only going to become more and more evident going forward. You guys are among the flag bearers that remind us that there's more to a good review than just getting excited. The language of assessment has to extend beyond just saying what's the new best. It needs to discuss in fairness and in depth and use broadly accessible benchmarks and talk in terms of familiar criteria. The language of both context and spirit. The fact that the better writers also tend to also be musically knowledgeable as well as technically aware just probably adds to the challenge. Thanks for your efforts in this.
|
Graham,
You would have loved my old journalism professor, John B. Bremner, a Brisbane native who left an indelible impression on me and thousands of others.
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/07/31/ob...r-is-dead.html
We could sure use more like him today.