If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Baltimore Brew)   Baltimore City Paper locks all its writers out from their own blogs over the fallout from a negative review of a Jason Aldean concert. Reason? Under Armour was protecting its house   (baltimorebrew.com) divider line 123
    More: Asinine, Washington City Paper, Jason Aldean, concerts  
•       •       •

5972 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Mar 2014 at 11:28 AM (28 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



123 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-01 02:29:36 PM

MFAWG: Z-clipped: MFAWG: Z-clipped: MFAWG: It's not like they pulled an expose on any number of things of actual import.

Not that the importance of the story is even relevant, but how do you not make the connection that the review was obviously important to someone or we wouldn't be talking about it?

We're talking about a reviewer that went to great lengths to point out that shiat stinks. Somehow the paper shiatcanning the review is the death of modern journalism.

I will say they probably shouldn't have printed it in the first place, but they're probably trying to stay edgy and relevant.

...Says the guy who has nothing left to post in defense of his position but evasion, cynicism and hyperbole.  I'm not impressed.

Good. Now go fark yourself.


LOL.
 
2014-03-01 02:31:17 PM

MFAWG: hlehmann: MFAWG: We're not talking about editorial content. We're talking about a review of a show by a pop artist.

Yes.  Yes you are talking about editorial content.  If it isn't. then why are the advertisers getting all pissy about it?

Because the reviewer is a dickhead.


I see.

So: you wrote an editorial, an *opinion* piece, based on not liking the quality or approach of someone's public piece.

But you used the word "dickhead," which is a really hipster thing to say. Yeah... we're gonna have to go ahead and yank your comment.
 
2014-03-01 02:31:18 PM

MFAWG: LibertyHiller: MFAWG: Lochsteppe: blunto: I understand the free speech aspect vs corporate control standpoint, but look at it from the other point of view.   You shouldn't send the french cuisine expert to review burger king or the fine arts expert to review a jackass movie.  This guy reviewed something that he was never going to like.  He wrote his review to partially and didn't take any of this into account in his choice to blast the show.  The advertisers pay for that paper and that writer to have a job.  Be a little more unbiased next time and things might end up more reasonably.

This part I agree with.

This part is dead wrong. The idea that advertisers should have any sort of editorial input is horrifying, cynical, undemocratic, and deeply corrupt. And yes, I know it's common.  Doesn't change things.

We're not talking about editorial content. We're talking about a review of a show by a pop artist.

Wow, you so do not have the vocabulary needed to understand the problem.

Explain it to me in small words then.


Either you get it now, or you're an idiot. Which is it?
 
2014-03-01 02:38:14 PM

ginkor: "Strum und Twang"?

Is that like something like "Sturm und Drang"?


By Jove, you've cracked the code.

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you: the latter-day Alan Turing.
 
2014-03-01 02:40:38 PM

ElLoco: I also have never heard of this guy.

Underarmour is the Bose, Monster Cable, and Heineken of the clothing industry... incredibly overpriced crapola that are effectively the absolute best products that marketing can buy.


Any recommended, not-overpriced alternatives in your experience?

/asking seriously
 
2014-03-01 02:44:02 PM

rugman11: Moopy Mac: MattyFridays: John the Magnificent:
2) A simple Google Search for "Travis Kitchens Country Music" would have saved you from embarrassing yourself.


A google search for Travis Kitchens Country Music links to this story, and a whole bunch of unrelated results.  Yes, he's a hugely respected and well known country music critic, GTFO.

No matter what, by his own admission, he went into that concert wanting to do a hit piece,  He was biased and had pre-conceived notions he couldn't let go of.

Where's this admission? Because in the article we are discussing he says the opposite.

I think it's pretty obvious from the tone of the review that he's writing a review for non-country music fans and that he's writing a review for them to laugh at.  I mean, right from the start, you get lines like

"Reams of rednecks streamed in from every direction across Baltimore Street and it took a half hour to get through the line and inside to will call."

How is this in any way a review of the show?  This line is only there to give people who wouldn't go to a concert like this (or probably any concert at an arena) a visual image to mock.  Or how about

"You might not recognize his name, but that's ok, because you probably wouldn't recognize his music either, or at least not be able to distinguish it from anything else on country radio."

I would like to think most country music fans are going to recognize Aldean.  He's been nominated for a crapload of CMAs and other country music awards (including Male Vocalist and Entertainer of the Year for three years running) and he was even nominated for a Grammy this year for Best Country Album.

If you want to write an article about the corporate invasion of country music, that would be interesting.  But this wasn't a review of a concert, it was a review of the people who would enjoy such a concert ("the adults in the crowd air scratched while half-staggering like they'd just had a stroke") and clearly was written for an audience that wouldn't listen to this music no matter what he says but who would enjoy having a good laugh at the "reams of rednecks."

They may as well have pulled the article and replaced it with this:


Like I said upthread, if you haven't read an issue of City Paper, that's the expected style. He has to conform just like every writer at every media outlet in the world.
 
2014-03-01 02:45:45 PM

semiotix: EatenTheSun: I dunno, but if he came stumbling out to coffee at the deer camp looking like that, there would be much laughter at his expense. It would be years before he lived it down.

Something tells me you'd have a better chance of Sarah Palin wandering up to your camp.



I don't think she can see it from her house.
 
2014-03-01 02:49:16 PM

brimed03: Any recommended, not-overpriced alternatives in your experience?


For what?  Wife beaters and underwear?  You really want internet recommendations on which tighty whities are the best at covering your ass for a reasonable price?
 
2014-03-01 02:55:32 PM

ReverendJasen: You really want internet recommendations on which tighty whities are the best at covering your ass for a reasonable price?


Yes, goddammit, and we want it with less backtalk!

/there's just so many choices, it's confusing
 
2014-03-01 02:58:49 PM

blunto: I understand the free speech aspect vs corporate control standpoint, but look at it from the other point of view.  You shouldn't send the french cuisine expert to review burger king or the fine arts expert to review a jackass movie.  This guy reviewed something that he was never going to like.  He wrote his review to partially and didn't take any of this into account in his choice to blast the show.  The advertisers pay for that paper and that writer to have a job.  Be a little more unbiased next time and things might end up more reasonably.


"When Travis Kitchens got the assignment from  City Paper to write about Jason Aldean's February 1 performance at the Baltimore Arena, the country music writer and filmmaker was hoping he would be pleasantly surprised by the mainstream C&W superstar".


The very FIRST paragraph tells you that Mr. Kitchens is a country music writer & filmmaker.  How did you come to the conclusion he wasn't going to like the concert? Did you even read the article? Methinks not.
 
2014-03-01 03:01:20 PM
Streisand Effect is at work 2 days in a row....
 
2014-03-01 03:22:21 PM

bratface: blunto: I understand the free speech aspect vs corporate control standpoint, but look at it from the other point of view.  You shouldn't send the french cuisine expert to review burger king or the fine arts expert to review a jackass movie.  This guy reviewed something that he was never going to like.  He wrote his review to partially and didn't take any of this into account in his choice to blast the show.  The advertisers pay for that paper and that writer to have a job.  Be a little more unbiased next time and things might end up more reasonably.

"When Travis Kitchens got the assignment from  City Paper to write about Jason Aldean's February 1 performance at the Baltimore Arena, the country music writer and filmmaker was hoping he would be pleasantly surprised by the mainstream C&W superstar".


The very FIRST paragraph tells you that Mr. Kitchens is a country music writer & filmmaker.  How did you come to the conclusion he wasn't going to like the concert? Did you even read the article? Methinks not.


The googles turns up this news story and a book the guy edited. So Streisand effect?
 
2014-03-01 03:36:48 PM

Phins: As an actual journalist, I feel compelled to sound off here.

 It's an absolute outrage that a new outlet would give in to complaints from an advertiser and pull a review. Advertisers should not be allowed to affect editorial content (and yes, a review is editorial content). There's supposed to be a brick wall a mile wide and higher than heaven between editorial and advertising. The business (advertising) side should have nothing to do with anyone or anything in editorial. This is a basic principle of journalism and journalistic ethics. To do otherwise is a betrayal of the readers and the public trust.

It doesn't matter what you think of the reviewer, it doesn't matter if he's a hipster douchbag, it doesn't matter if he went in with a bad attitude, etc.It's not his job to "to determine whether the artist brought what the people went to see."  He's a reviewer, it's his job to give his opinion of the show. If he wants to make comments about the crowd at the show, he can do that. It's within the purview of the editor to exercise editorial control and it would have been perfectly acceptable for his editor to make changes. But editors tend to be pretty hands-off with reviewers and columnists since, once again, it's their job to give their opinion. You simply can't say a reviewer is biased, he's not supposed to be unbiased. His job description is to be biased, to give his opinion. It's impossible for a review to be "a hit piece" because it's one person's opinion.

 The only relevant fact about his story is that he's a reviewer, paid for his opinion.

You're free to dislike or disagree with his opinion. That doesn't make the paper wrong for publishing his opinion, whatever it may be.

pdieten: Thing is, this wasn't an honest review .
This was absolutely an honest review. It was the reviewer's honest opinion of the show. It would only be a dishonest review if he wrote something that was NOT his honest opinion.

pdieten: Your job as a reviewer is to determine whether the ar ...


This is where the expression "Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and they all stink" becomes relevant....

I don't see how you review any artistic performance (and we can disagree as to whether Jason Aldean is "art" - I don't appreciate his act, but the point is that he was there to put on a show for his fans) and just have an opinion about it without bothering to consider whether the artist accomplished the goal he set out to fulfill. As a reviewer, you don't have to like the goal. In fact you're free to hate the goal. But if you're going to expect to be paid as a professional reviewer, you ought to be able to set your own preferences aside and consider the intent of the show. That's how you bring value as as professional reviewer. To just hate it without any consideration as to its intended context makes the opinion worthless. If you can't even set aside your own personal preferences, then why should anyone give up good money to hear your opinion instead of anyone else's?
 
2014-03-01 03:58:01 PM

El Freak: I can't imagine how anybody with two brain cells to rub together and any sort of taste in music could give that tripe anything BUT a negative review. It's stupid music for stupid people. You want a positive review? Then  send Cletus or Brandine from the local trailer park.

/snob


QFT.
 
2014-03-01 04:37:38 PM
If anyone is interested here is the original review.

A review of Jason Aldean's 1/1/14 concert at Baltimore Arena

By Travis Kitchens
Baltimore Arena smelled like the inside of a Spearmint Rhino Saturday night. Reams of rednecks streamed in from every direction across Baltimore Street and it took a half hour to get through the line and inside to will call. They all came to see Jason Aldean.  You might not recognize his name, but  that's okay, because you probably wouldn't recognize his music either, or at least not be able to distinguish it from anything else on country radio.
I grabbed an $11.50 beer, passing booths selling shirts and koozies reading "I'm About To Get My Pissed-Off On," and lots of Fireball Whisky schwag. Drinking Fireball gives you a slight cinnamon burn in the throat, then travels to the stomach, and, judging from the men's bathrooms, immediately evacuates the bowels and gut. The puke smell along with loud shiatty music and fog machines reminded me of traveling from Kentucky to Florida for Spring Break in high school, and that makes me part of Aldean's target market.

Tyler Farr, the opening act, looks like Joey Fatone from N'Sync, and he's only slightly less talented. Farr shuffled around the stage Saturday night with a prop guitar hanging from his neck like a No Limit chain, announcing the chart position of every song before playing it. "Ain't' Even Drinkin'" is the I-hope-this-night-never-ends prom song, a teen smash spell hand-crafted in a Nashville laboratory. "Ain't even drinking but I'm buzzing baby/ain't even smoking but I'm so stoned/feels like I'm getting lit/ain't even took a sip/but I'm already gone."

The crowd was infected, and showed their enthusiasm by gently poking the sky in a circular motion with I-don't-give-a-fark faces on. "Whiskey in My Water," a shiatkicker twist on "Me and My Girlfriend," starts by ripping off the melody of Shooter Jennings' "Fourth of July." The artificiality and repetitiveness of his songs may have contributed to the vomit smell, and I felt like I was being subjected to military torture.

Whatever trivial contribution white people may have previously made to rap music has now been permanently nullified by pop country rap duo Florida Georgia Line. The Line was created from the leftover scraps of the Showbiz Pizza band, and they have an impressive number of programs, or songs. Beach balls were dispatched to the audience for "Party People," and generic video footage playing on four jumbotron monitors above the band illustrated each song: dirt bike races and buggy mudding, video models molesting muscle cars, and giant all-white stadium crowds waving cell phones and American flags. "Gonna get buckwild/get a little buzz on/David Lee Roth style/might as well jump, jump."

Each song is basically an advertisement performed live for the audience, the most blatant example being "Cruise." Footage of new Chevy trucks play on the jumbotrons while they sing: "You make me wanna roll my windows down and cruise/down a back road blowin' stop signs through the middle/every little farm town with you/in this brand new Chevy with a lift kit/would look a hell of a lot better with you up in it."

Advertising and country music is not a new relationship (Hank Williams shilled for Mother's Best Flour, etc), but the way it has seeped into the songs and motivations of the artists has reached new and vulgar heights. They mentioned sponsor Fireball Whisky in the song lyrics and several times in between, and said to the roughly 14,000 people in attendance, "You guys truly are life changing." Considering their latest album has already sold over 1.5 million copies, I would imagine that's true.

Finally it was time for the headliner, Jason Aldean, whose show was a lot like watching a two hour beer commercial, and I don't think his fans are unaware of that. You don't listen to and enjoy Aldean's music, you take it. It's a mindless dopamine rush as precise in it's effects as methamphetamine, and the not-so-subliminal marketing strategy deployed on the audience is as sophisticated as that of a presidential campaign. He struts around the stage with his prop guitar like a rockstar android wiggling his ass in a manner so contrived it makes Madonna look like Miles Davis in comparison. Aldean uses the "Margaritaville" market approach, tailored for the Buckwild generation. His empire is sponsored by Under Armour and Southern Comfort and there's talk of a new redneck themed restaurant venture called Fly Over Steaks, where patrons are served and sweared at by waiters dressed as the cast of the television show Duck Dynasty (fingers crossed for an Inner Harbor location).
Aldean's band looks like action figures from Spencers, and play like the American Idol house band. There were occasional flourishes of pedal-steel guitar, along with non-stop ear-splitting bass, a horrifyingly awful attempt at rapping, and brash guitar solos in every song. During "Dirt Road Anthem," the adults in the crowd air scratched while half-staggering like they'd just had a stroke (imagine your grandma as an extra in the "Nothin' But A G Thang" video). Aldean also rekindled his ongoing beef with Justin Bieber, this time taking shots at Biebs over who is more influential with hair styles. It was a chilling moment, and it was clear that this crowd did not like Justin Bieber one bit.

But the highlight of the night was Aldean singing a duet with a hologram of Kelly Clarkson. I didn't know she was a hologram at the time, but I'm now wondering if Aldean was even there, and hoping he wasn't.
 
2014-03-01 08:03:15 PM

brimed03: ElLoco: I also have never heard of this guy.

Underarmour is the Bose, Monster Cable, and Heineken of the clothing industry... incredibly overpriced crapola that are effectively the absolute best products that marketing can buy.

Any recommended, not-overpriced alternatives in your experience?

/asking seriously


ColdPruf and Carhardtt are lower priced alternatives. The best is probably Polartec, but Odlo or Smartwool makes some really good stuff priced similarly to Under Armour if you're looking for top performance. I personally order ColdPruf items online for 'generic' everyday use because of the price... and Polartec under IonGear mid layers when it's stupid cold and windy. The wool is nice, but I find that it can develop a kinda funky smell after time and multiple washings. Not a b.o. smell, but just a hint of something like you think maybe a wet dog ran by somewhere upwind, but your not sure when or where.

I don't have any experience with warm weather gear that doesn't involve beer, koozies for said beer, cheap shorts and/or an equally cheap Tshirt with the optional Vibrams that my wife says makes me look like a hippie douchebag. /shrug
 
2014-03-01 09:51:21 PM
    
Phins: As an actual journalist, I feel compelled to sound off here.
 It's an absolute outrage that a new outlet would give in to complaints from an advertiser and pull a review. Advertisers should not be allowed to affect editorial content (and yes, a review is editorial content). There's supposed to be a brick wall a mile wide and higher than heaven between editorial and advertising. The business (advertising) side should have nothing to do with anyone or anything in editorial. This is a basic principle of journalism and journalistic ethics. To do otherwise is a betrayal of the readers and the public trust.
It doesn't matter what you think of the reviewer, it doesn't matter if he's a hipster douchbag, it doesn't matter if he went in with a bad attitude, etc.It's not his job to "to determine whether the artist brought what the people went to see."  He's a reviewer, it's his job to give his opinion of the show. If he wants to make comments about the crowd at the show, he can do that. It's within the purview of the editor to exercise editorial control and it would have been perfectly acceptable for his editor to make changes. But editors tend to be pretty hands-off with reviewers and columnists since, once again, it's their job to give their opinion. You simply can't say a reviewer is biased, he's not supposed to be unbiased. His job description is to be biased, to give his opinion. It's impossible for a review to be "a hit piece" because it's one person's opinion.
 The only relevant fact about his story is that he's a reviewer, paid for his opinion.

You're free to dislike or disagree with his opinion. That doesn't make the paper wrong for publishing his opinion, whatever it may be.

pdieten: Thing is, this wasn't an honest review .

This was absolutely an honest review. It was the reviewer's honest opinion of the show. It would only be a dishonest review if he wrote something that was NOT his honest opinion.
pdieten: Your job as a reviewer is to determine whether the ar ...

pdieten: This is where the expression "Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and they all stink" becomes relevant....
I don't see how you review any artistic performance (and we can disagree as to whether Jason Aldean is "art" - I don't appreciate his act, but the point is that he was there to put on a show for his fans) and just have an opinion about it without bothering to consider whether the artist accomplished the goal he set out to fulfill. As a reviewer, you don't have to like the goal. In fact you're free to hate the goal. But if you're going to expect to be paid as a professional reviewer, you ought to be able to set your own preferences aside and consider the intent of the show. That's how you bring value as as professional reviewer. To just hate it without any consideration as to its intended context makes the opinion worthless. If you can't even set aside your own personal preferences, then why should anyone give up good money to hear your opinion instead of anyone else's?
 

pdieten: Phins: As an actual journalist, I feel compelled to sound off here.

 It's an absolute outrage that a new outlet would give in to complaints from an advertiser and pull a review. Advertisers should not be allowed to affect editorial content (and yes, a review is editorial content). There's supposed to be a brick wall a mile wide and higher than heaven between editorial and advertising. The business (advertising) side should have nothing to do with anyone or anything in editorial. This is a basic principle of journalism and journalistic ethics. To do otherwise is a betrayal of the readers and the public trust.

It doesn't matter what you think of the reviewer, it doesn't matter if he's a hipster douchbag, it doesn't matter if he went in with a bad attitude, etc.It's not his job to "to determine whether the artist brought what the people went to see."  He's a reviewer, it's his job to give his opinion of the show. If he wants to make comments about the crowd at the show, he can do that. It's within the purview of the editor to exercise editorial control and it would have been perfectly acceptable for his editor to make changes. But editors tend to be pretty hands-off with reviewers and columnists since, once again, it's their job to give their opinion. You simply can't say a reviewer is biased, he's not supposed to be unbiased. His job description is to be biased, to give his opinion. It's impossible for a review to be "a hit piece" because it's one person's opinion.

 The only relevant fact about his story is that he's a reviewer, paid for his opinion.

You're free to dislike or disagree with his opinion. That doesn't make the paper wrong for publishing his opinion, whatever it may be.

pdieten: Thing is, this wasn't an honest review .
This was absolutely an honest review. It was the reviewer's honest opinion of the show. It would only be a dishonest review if he wrote something that was NOT his honest opinion.

pdieten: Your job as a reviewer is to determine whether ...


pdieten: This is where the expression "Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and they all stink" becomes relevant....
I don't see how you review any artistic performance (and we can disagree as to whether Jason Aldean is "art" - I don't appreciate his act, but the point is that he was there to put on a show for his fans) and just have an opinion about it without bothering to consider whether the artist accomplished the goal he set out to fulfill. As a reviewer, you don't have to like the goal. In fact you're free to hate the goal. But if you're going to expect to be paid as a professional reviewer, you ought to be able to set your own preferences aside and consider the intent of the show. That's how you bring value as as professional reviewer. To just hate it without any consideration as to its intended context makes the opinion worthless. If you can't even set aside your own personal preferences, then why should anyone give up good money to hear your opinion instead of anyone else's?


You're speaking absolute nonsense. No where in the job description of a reviewer is anything about "the intent of the show" or "the goal of the show." I've never, ever heard anyone even talk about such a thing in the context of a review.

The reviewer's job description is pretty simple: give his/her opinion of the show. That's it. If you thought the show was awful, you write about how awful it was. If you thought it was, you write about how good it was. Being a reviewer means that you get paid to give your opinion. There's no requirement or expectation to "set your own preferences aside" or develop psychic powers to determine "the intent of the show."

I'm sorry you like this performer and didn't like the review. But that doesn't change the fact that the reviewer did his job properly.
 
2014-03-01 10:26:10 PM
No, he didn't do his job. Or let me phrase it this way instead: I have higher expectations for people who write reviews than what was presented here. I expect them to attend, pay attention, and absorb the show with a reasonably open mind.

Now understand that I do not like Jason Aldean's music. I go out of my way to avoid it. I have little to nothing in common with the people who do like his music, and if I went to such a show I'd probably have a reaction not much different from what the review said.

However, if I were forced to attend a concert of his, knowing full well in advance what i was going to see (and you'd have to be pretty dense to not know going in), then considering that somebody is paying me to write a review, I'd at least put in enough effort to try to determine if the people who paid to attend the show got their money's worth instead of talking about what I think about the entire music scene that Jason Aldean lives in.

It is intellectually dishonest to present yourself as a reviewer and then present the world with this output. That review really does read like a hit piece from someone who'd already made up his mind exactly what he thinks about Jason Aldean long before he even got to the arena. I realize that the sort of people who like this kind of music are not within the target market of the average city alt-weekly paper, and this review might not be unpopular with them. That's beside the point. The paper sent him, they paid him for it, and he owed the paper and the readers better quality work than this.
 
2014-03-02 01:48:03 AM

ElLoco: brimed03: ElLoco: I also have never heard of this guy.

Underarmour is the Bose, Monster Cable, and Heineken of the clothing industry... incredibly overpriced crapola that are effectively the absolute best products that marketing can buy.

Any recommended, not-overpriced alternatives in your experience?

/asking seriously

ColdPruf and Carhardtt are lower priced alternatives. The best is probably Polartec, but Odlo or Smartwool makes some really good stuff priced similarly to Under Armour if you're looking for top performance. I personally order ColdPruf items online for 'generic' everyday use because of the price... and Polartec under IonGear mid layers when it's stupid cold and windy. The wool is nice, but I find that it can develop a kinda funky smell after time and multiple washings. Not a b.o. smell, but just a hint of something like you think maybe a wet dog ran by somewhere upwind, but your not sure when or where.

I don't have any experience with warm weather gear that doesn't involve beer, koozies for said beer, cheap shorts and/or an equally cheap Tshirt with the optional Vibrams that my wife says makes me look like a hippie douchebag. /shrug


Smartwool makes some of the best functional clothing on the planet, and by far the best baselayers.  They're expensive as shiat, but worth every penny.  It's the only fabric that actually keeps you warm in cold weather and also relatively cool in warm weather.  And they make magical socks that somehow manage not to smell bad even after 2 or 3 consecutive days of wear.
 
2014-03-02 02:41:33 AM

ReverendJasen: brimed03: Any recommended, not-overpriced alternatives in your experience?

For what?  Wife beaters and underwear?  You really want internet recommendations on which tighty whities are the best at covering your ass for a reasonable price?


I was talking about their performance gear, but whatever, you're being clever for free, it's *wonderful!*
 
2014-03-02 02:43:35 AM

I alone am best: brimed03: ZAZ: Both sides are getting way too worked up over a pop concert.

Or, you know, freedom of the press, including from corporate interests.

/I forget: Americans don't care about that old-fashioned stuff like that anymore. Constitutional rights are as passe as "loving your country."
//The Tea Party is guilty of a lot of terrible things, but maybe none so bad as making "conservative" as bad a smear as "liberal" became thirty years ago.
///No, I don't believe patriotism and constitutional defense are inherently conservative values. In fact, perhaps no one has done more to destroy them than the modern conservative movement. But in the public mind they are closely associated. And those who rightly throw out the Tea Party bathwater unfortunately also often throw out the Constitutional baby too.

You should seek help.


I am.  Every Election Day.
 
2014-03-02 02:50:03 AM

MFAWG: brimed03: MattyFridays: John the Magnificent:
2) A simple Google Search for "Travis Kitchens Country Music" would have saved you from embarrassing yourself.


A google search for Travis Kitchens Country Music links to this story, and a whole bunch of unrelated results.  Yes, he's a hugely respected and well known country music critic, GTFO.

No matter what, by his own admission, he went into that concert wanting to do a hit piece,  He was biased and had pre-conceived notions he couldn't let go of.

Maybe I need to reread tfa because nowhere did I see anything that made me think he went there to do a hit piece. Maybe it didn't sound as though he expected to have a good time personally, but he said he hoped if it was good enough his friends could go and enjoy it.

A critic's job isn't actually to *like* the thing being reviewed. The job is to say whether the thing was *done well.* Professional are very capable of making the distinction. They have to be. Just as you don't have to like every aspect of your job, but you still have to do it well.

He actually complains about the odor of the fecal matter of the fans.

Quality journalism there


He's describing the concert experience from soup to nuts.

What the hell, man?  Because a bona-fide critic doesn't do it YOUR way, it's ok to tank free speech?  Are you at all listening to yourself?

/I hope you are, because someone has to and I'm done with it.
 
2014-03-02 02:52:50 AM

ElLoco: brimed03: ElLoco: I also have never heard of this guy.

Underarmour is the Bose, Monster Cable, and Heineken of the clothing industry... incredibly overpriced crapola that are effectively the absolute best products that marketing can buy.

Any recommended, not-overpriced alternatives in your experience?

/asking seriously

ColdPruf and Carhardtt are lower priced alternatives. The best is probably Polartec, but Odlo or Smartwool makes some really good stuff priced similarly to Under Armour if you're looking for top performance. I personally order ColdPruf items online for 'generic' everyday use because of the price... and Polartec under IonGear mid layers when it's stupid cold and windy. The wool is nice, but I find that it can develop a kinda funky smell after time and multiple washings. Not a b.o. smell, but just a hint of something like you think maybe a wet dog ran by somewhere upwind, but your not sure when or where.

I don't have any experience with warm weather gear that doesn't involve beer, koozies for said beer, cheap shorts and/or an equally cheap Tshirt with the optional Vibrams that my wife says makes me look like a hippie douchebag. /shrug


This is great, thanks! I used to subscribe to some camping/hiking gearhead magazines but found they only really reviewed the well-known (read: large magazine advertising budget) brands like UA.  I haven't really gone poking around internet sites for the cheaper-but-as-good stuff.
 
Displayed 23 of 123 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report