>you want to write about music
>have no experience doing so
>afraid of not delivering quality content
what do?
aside from the obvious advice of reading other
people's writing, is there anything else I should
know?
pic related, the editorial's my work
no /mu/tant ever wanted to write about music?
that's odd
>wanting to be the lowest form of journalist
>>65051315
>lowest form
How come? Aren't political commentaries the lowest form of journalism?
>>65050979
write clickbait articles of trendy stuff under a girl's name
I've been analyzing Anthony Fantano's reviews and what he does is always in the same tunnel:
>what?
>by whom?,
>who is this and what have they done before
>a bit of an opinion about (topic), a bit of an opinion about (previous by artist)
>describe what happens from the beginning to the end
>quasi-criticize the work to avoid backfire
>compare previous work to (topic)
>explain your own interpretation
>use buzzwords
>a bit of information about similar/related
>adjective adjective adjective adjective
>personal opinion overall
>rate
>end
>>65051424
>trendy stuff
What stuff is "trendy" in music?
>>65051616
race and gender politics, rape accusations, basically any thing that relates somewhat to music but actually has nothing to do with music
>>65051809
Problem is, the blog is about promoting good soundcloud-genera-type musicians. There's nothing to use as clickbait.
>>65051860
promote feminist artist or artist who's music is about gender issues
you can find plenty all over.
I have a blog but I just post zips to albums I like.
>>65051905
Can I see it?
>>65050979
>no experience
>no ability to deliver quality content
sounds like you're pitchfork-ready!
>>65051964
Is pitchfork really that bad?
>>65051942
I'd rather not post a link here. Can I shoot you an email?
>>65051979
imo they have absolutely no standards in their reviews at all. A p4k review doesn't have to describe the music well or judge it credibly
>>65052089
I don't know whether or not this was a joke but I sent you an email.
>>65052205
i'll browse it frequently for downloads, thanks
>>65052269
Sweet! Thank you. :-)
>>65050979
ignore the people who're being dicks here, just keep writing! you're bound to improve with time, and if you've got passion for what you're talking about and a clear writing voice, i'm sure you'll do fine c:
>>65052361
thank you anon
