Journalists' take on live shows

Ever wonder why every concert at Madison Square Garden—or wherever else it happens to be—is treated like some divine revelation by the press? You flip through the papers and it’s always the same story: "absolutely legendary," "unforgettable," "a total masterpiece." It's all praise, zero pushback. Every single show is somehow flawless. Whether it was Bruce Springsteen, John Mayer, or just some massive international superstar, the reviews are identical. How is it even possible that every performance is a stroke of genius? Has critical thinking just vanished from the industry entirely? I mean, seriously—does every newsroom just hire people straight out of the artist's own fan club these days?

If he keeps acting out like this, they won't grant him accreditation for the next one 🤷 pure capitalism 🙂

Benjamin Thompson66 said:I wonder if the editors are only sending stuff out to fan club members, or what the deal is...

Yeah, that seems to be the case. 😁

By the way, Kevin Chavez3, do you happen to have anything for sale at the moment? 🙂

Honestly, it’s probably just the way things work where serious critics mostly stick to shows they already know they're going to enjoy, while the rest of the press just feels this automatic pressure to hype everything up because if the crowd had a blast, then clearly the show was a hit, even though people usually have a great time regardless.

I'll give you that, the whole setup is pretty far from ideal.

Not really. Take this recent example, for instance:

And I remember Dragaš getting nothing but bad reviews, to put it mildly. It was a long time ago, sure, but I’ll never forget that "(O)Duran (O)Duran" headline. 😁

Journalists tend to be total sycophants—if they write a scathing review, there’s always that looming threat of being blacklisted by the organizers next time, and nobody wants to risk that kind of professional suicide.
The problem is, most reporters don't actually grasp the nuance of what they're supposed to be listening to... so they just end up regurgitating whatever the crowd is shouting...

Is it just me, or does this feel a little strange for our struggling nation? 🙏

Robin Rodriguez5 said:"Duran, Duran"

🤣

Honestly, this Broadway show is such a total scam, so I'm not even surprised everyone's trashing it...

Robin Rodriguez5 said:I’ll never forget that "(O)Duran (O)Duran" moment 😁

It’s also a real drag when some high-brow critic shows up to a show where they already know deep down they just have to fake it through the night, and honestly, I can't stand that kind of cheap gimmickry...

I don't recall the exact wording of that piece, but I'd actually be curious to hear what they found so unbearable about it since that NYC show was killer (and trust me, I'm no less much of a punk than Dragaš 😛).

Then again, people always eat up it when someone takes a swing at an easy target, like those Lukovićev reviews...

Yeah, that's just not my style 🤷.

boldeagle3 said:Journalists can be total suck-ups. If they write a bad review, there’s always that fear they might not get press credentials from the organizers next time—and nobody wants to risk that.

It's not even the reporters; it's the editors. They're the ones stepping in to tweak stories if things don't look right, mostly because they want to stay on good terms with the event organizers. 😉

(o)Duran (o)Duran was such a fantastic headline 😍

Real critical writing is basically extinct, except for those tiny niche blogs where nobody cares about accuracy because the bands they’re reviewing don't have any clout. Dragaš is honestly the absolute king of bad taste. I can't get over his weirdly suggestive way of describing skinny rock guys—all that stuff about sweat and physique... give me a break. And of course, every band from the North America is treated like they're the greatest thing on earth. Look, I don't have anything against them, but let's try to maintain some sense of proportion, shall we?

boldeagle3 said:Reporters are total suck-ups. If they write something bad, there’s a real chance the organizers won't give them credentials next time, and nobody wants that.
Most journalists don't even bother listening to the music; they just write whatever the crowd is shouting.

Honestly, reporters don't care what they write because organizers basically hand out passes like candy based on who they're buddies with at certain media outlets. They don't write critical stuff because:

1) they pick shows for bands they actually like anyway
2) they end up wasted as hell by the end of the night and write reviews in a drunken stupor
3) they spend the whole night chatting with other reporters, miss the actual set, and then feel too awkward to leave a bad review
4) their parents were big-shot industry insiders

Just my two cents.🤷

Susan Clark10 said:It isn't even the reporters—it's the editors. They're the ones stepping in to tweak the copy if they feel a certain way about it... mostly because they want to stay on the good side of the event organizers. 😉

Exactly.

But I’ve certainly met my fair share of actual journalists too... 😁

Adam Moore said:Journalists are terrified of what they might write—mostly because organizers hand out press passes like candy to anyone they have a cozy relationship with at a major network or media outlet. Critical coverage is basically non-existent since journalists:

sooooo not true 😁

boldeagle3 said:that's just not how it works 😁

Come on, it's totally true. I've never had an accreditation rejected in my entire life, regardless of how I applied. You just list your editorial outlet and you're in.

Kate Sullivan22 said:In all my years, I have never had an accreditation denied. Not once, not even close...

God help me dealing with the American press corps🙏 🙏 🙏 🤣

It feels pretty pathetic to beg for credentials just to walk in for free and write absolutely nothing. I’d feel like a total fraud if I did that.

Robin Rodriguez5 said:Well, I wouldn't say that's quite true. Here is a recent example:

I also remember Dragaš getting some—to put it mildly—less than glowing reviews. It was ages ago, sure, but I'll never forget that headline, "(O)Duran (O)Duran." 😁

True, but that was a lifetime ago. Ever since this massive beast of an arena opened up, every single show seems to be a "must-see"... if you can believe it. I suppose they have to justify those millions of dollars spent, right? I recall seeing Iggy Pop at Madison Square Garden years back—it was pretty much panned by critics, and honestly, having been there, they weren't wrong. Later, when he played Fenway Park, he was much better—they were right then, too. Even back during those early festivals, there were plenty of acts that got torn apart. Now, everyone is suddenly a superstar, even someone as mainstream as Lilly Allen. It really feels like either they're playing it safe or they've completely lost their sense of direction.

Who even needs journalism when you've got the Forum!

Kate Sullivan22 said:Oh, come on, it's true. In my entire life, I've never had an accreditation request denied—written or otherwise, not even close. You just list your editorial staff and everything goes through smooth as silk.

Kevin Chavez3 said:I really don't envy American journalists right now 🙏 🙏 🙏 🤣

😬

Since we're talking about credentials and people who basically beg despite having zero journalism experience, I have to copy and paste an email I once received:

Best regards,
I noticed you published several pieces regarding Coachella last year, so I assume you attended.
I've secured press accreditation for this year, so could you please explain how the process works?
Is there an entry fee, and if so, how much?
Where should I check in?
I hope you won't mind answering.

😁