Music blogs moved on from being self-obsessed, online vanity projects some years ago. Sure there’s still a sense of them being personal, independent and amateur, but upon these sites are voices and opinions that are commonly regarded as ‘tastemakers’ within the music industry. The blogging sphere is a zone in which influence can now be dispensed, giving useful, ever-growing spotlights to the music we cover. Blogs have created a place where you can genuinely discover something new, a home which is now anchored at the new cutting edges of emerging music. They’ve not so much replaced the traditional music media, more they’ve added a new exciting layer to the underground of music.
However, if these voices are to be heard, which in most of the established music blog’s cases is with a growing readership, with opinions that can truly count, then there really is no reason why they cannot be delivered with the same quality of writing than that found in other media. Sadly though, for the most part, this untrained delivery service has established itself with no formal training on how to write reviews or prose. As Henry Copeland recently remarked for his ten year blog review, “the amount of quality content has rocketed, the amount of non-quality content has grown even faster“. Our voices are experiencing an ever-increasing volume, yet so many of us continue to speak with a muddled language.
Well today we are attempting to tighten things up. We love our blogging peers, as was witnessed with our recent Blog Up meeting, or with consultative work on the soon-to-launch Music Robot project, but on too many occasions we find ourselves reading blog posts with appalling editorial. The music they select may be regularly exceptional, but the pieces that frame the music are so often not. There’s no need for this, as a few basic rules can provide a giant lift in how their opinions and descriptions are delivered. We’re not suggesting that The Recommender is perfect, we’re certainly not doing this to preach to others, as we’ve never been formally trained either, but we feel that our passion for music discovery could and should be packaged in the best wrapping possible.
A style guide is something every other traditional publishing house has developed, where they outline the basic house rules for all writing. Below is our Blogger’s Style Guide, handing out some helpful tips that should work universally. If you write and edit a blog then please try and adopt these guidelines to at least some extent, perhaps passing them on to any new writers that you take on board, so that we can carry on gaining professional respect and grow our audience even further. There’s no harm in improvements, especially if there’s no cost to the excellent work you already provide with your (usually unpaid) delivery service. Enjoy your new packaging.
Titles of things mentioned in any text are italicised, with no quote marks. For example, Bob Dylan’s album, Blonde On Blonde. It’s helpful if you can do this because some titles are kind of oblique and readers might not realise what the title is and what is your own pithy comment.
Cliches are careless. They ruin your posts and are always spotted, so please leave them for the lazy writers. You wouldn’t talk in cliches so do not write in them. This includes: “shimmering synths“, or “dreamscapes“, or “rumbling bass“, or “angular guitars“. Deep down you know how to spot them, so be honest with yourself.
We prefer not to refer to ourselves as I or me. All references to ourselves and our fascinating opinions are credited to we and us. If you, a singular person, like something, then perhaps you should still say “we liked this.”
If being critical, try and maintain a respect for both yourself and your subjects. Some people believe in being tender, however some of the best critics let their subjects have it with both barrels. At the very least be constructive and well-informed, and humour often helps if delivered with imagination. Remember that we are pointing at butterflies, not catching them.
Grammar and prose on music blogs can perhaps be treated with less caution than other traditional media publications, but some phrases really are just wrong. This style guide is not an English lesson, so please make your own comprehensive list of phrases you absolutely must avoid.
Decade references are almost always just the decade and an ‘s’. 80s is a good example of this. As is 60s. The last decade was the noughties or the 00s. We don’t know what this new one is officially called yet, but we’ll keep you informed. Individual years are written with an apostrophe though, for example ’79, ‘07.
Numbers look ugly in text. So it’s a three-piece band, not a 3-piece. See? Ugh. If the number is seventy-nine thousand, four hundred and fifty-seven, that just looks stupid, so please use numerals for numbers greater than nine.
All genres are in lower case and tend not to have hyphens in them. For example: hip hop, drum’n’bass, r’n’b, rock’n’roll, indie rock. Where you have an apostrophe, as in r’n’b, you don’t need spaces as well. DJ is always in capitals.
Every word in a title or a name begins with a capital letter. Look at the Of in Kings Of Leon. Some people don’t think this is right, but you should ignore those people.
If you use an exclamation mark, please stop, look, think, check and then in all probability remove it. You should be able to express excitement without them.
Ampersands (&) should never be used in the body of text, unless its in a band’s name or a title of something.
Hyphenation is a tricky one. Generally speaking, people hyphenate a bit too much. Line-up and set-list are always hyphenated, other than that you only really need it if there’s any ambiguity about what your words might mean without one
If you think that the reader may not be sure of what you reference, make sure you explain it. Dropping in other band names, record labels etc is often useful, but say it in a way so that readers get the context. (i.e. “…the record label, Bella Union, signed them last year,…”)
“Who, what, where, when” should frame the story you are trying tell. The “Why” may well provide the arc of the story but the first four criteria must never be ignored.
Never write for other bloggers to read. We write for our readers, so avoid trying too hard, quit the name-dropping and strange Russian art-house references.
Sentences can be short. Having to break up very long sentences can lead to extensive rewriting. Sentences and words should be separated by a single spacebar hit.
Be wary when classifying bands and artists with the genre of chillwave; you know that it was invented as a derogatory joke by Hipster Runoff, right? Perhaps the genre of glo-fi is better deployed in this instance, or simply avoid pigeon holes altogether.
Gratuitous language is usually strictly avoided in traditional media, but we believe blogs can often sidestep this as they are personal and independent from other music journalism, however perhaps re-read profanities and think again as to whether it is absolutely essential to the piece.
Try not to allow people’s claims and opinions to come across as statements of fact. Attribute your sources and contextualise where ever possible.
Commas can impede the flow of a sentence, but forgetting them could change its meaning, so please tread carefully.
Concision is one of the greatest virtues of expression and, therefore, of journalism.
Never underestimate the reader’s understanding of a subject, so try and avoid patronising remarks, such as “…the singer Madonna“.
If your post is attacked in the public comments section, or on social networks, perhaps just get over it. Your opinions are not wrong, so do not let anyone suggest otherwise, but respect other’s opinions too. If you must respond then remember this is your blog, so either take a deep breath and reply with a considered response, or, if all else fails, tell them to go fuck themselves, because ultimately you are in control.
So there it is. Hope it helped? Please remember, this is not a rule book, it is a guide. Hopefully it can assist in some small way, so either take it all on board, or take just some of it, or indeed leave it altogether, its up to you. As music bloggers we are neither broad sheet, nor tabloid. Blogs are free from almost all traditional restrictions, but we do share one commonality, an audience, and they deserve to be rewarded with tidy editorial. If they are not, then you risk frustrating, mis-informing, or even worse, losing them altogether.
Of course this guide won’t apply to absolutely everyone, although we’ve tried to lay it out as a broad look at best-practice. Do not fear these points, or your readers. Neither of them will make you a good writer, or good at spelling. Also, please note that this guide will not improve your humour, or your research, or change your opinions, or improve your choices, it is only to help frame your writing in a more structured form.
Do not forget that one of the key ingredients involved in blogging, and one that ultimately differentiates us from traditional media, is that we can be an independent voice, a personality, so never lose sight of your character when applying the points listed above.
Good journalism is about good judgement, so where there are grey areas, try and remain logical, well-researched and avoid patronising the reader. On the one hand you can presume the reader has been on a desert island, but on the other you should avoid spoon-feeding facts and information. Continue to write from your heart, write with passion and use your imagination. And remember, opinions can be disagreed with, but they can never be wrong. (MB)
Very interesting piece that illuminates the problems of those without professional training entering what was once a solely professional environment. I do think that the internet was supposed to be egalitarian, to be an open space where people communicate without constrictions of style. In the areas of music journalism presumably the vernacular is part of that communication. Certainly most music bloggers talk to their own community or congregation where language that may not sit well in the written form offers a greater level of understanding and therefore communication if at the same time excluding those outside that community. I certainly agree with all the points you raise but I can see a situation where this might not be necessary. The dumbing down of the written word is only following in the footsteps of visual imagery where now no consideration of visual language is acceptable. The ubiquitous use of phone cameras producing images that do little more than say ‘this happened’ are sought after by the print and broadcast media to the exclusion of those by professional photographers. I support your intentions but these are sad times for anyone wishing to maintain quality.
It was just a guide, not a rule book, so I accept that not all of them are necessary or applicable, but at least it makes people think.
As someone who has grown up in an age surrounded by technology, such as digital photography, computers and the internet, I still care for quality and intelligence, so it seems a shame that it’s allowed society to dumb down.
Its probably a losing battle, but in my attempts to maintain a certain quality I can at least know that I tried. I hate to imagine what things will be like in 100 years, but if I complain I’ll just sound like an old man, so I’ll just do my best to maintain some level of standards.
It’s because you are representing your blog, almost as a brand. All traditional publications do this.
There is a grey area though…
The question is, do you consider blogging to be the same as Gonzo journalism, attributed to the likes of Hunter S Thompson, which sets out to write about a subject from the point of view of the person experiencing it? Gonzo journalism is almost as much about the person writing it as it is the subject.
Or is music blogging more like traditional journalism, using a detached writing style that involves facts or quotations that can be verified by third parties. It is impersonal and more about the subject being reported.
In my opinion blogs sit somewhere between the two, so it’s really up to you (this style guide was just a guide after all). The best blogs are delivered with a voice, so they’re personal in that respect, but they are often all about the subject, not the reporter, so that’s more traditional. You can always switch between the two styles too, writing in the traditional way for the most part, but switching to a Gonzo style when reviewing gigs.
There is no wrong way to do it, but The Recommender chooses to be more like the traditional style. Also, lots of blogs have more than one writer, so you are representing your team when writing, so that deserves a ‘we’ style.
As long as nobody else contributed actively to the text/post you don’t represent your team. You represent yourself.
With music more than many other things it’s subjective, but you suggest with that “we” that your opinion is the (objective) consensus of a team. Or you’re a noble that could be another explanation.
Interesting piece Mike, and I think I follow most of these although do step into the cliche boundaries every now and again. As I said before, when you sent a similar, but less complete, guide around SiS it was very useful.
I’ve got a couple of points to add though…
With numbers, I was always taught that you use numbers for numbers bigger than twelve – for example 13 would be written as a number. Not a hard and fast rule by any means, but having a number in your head stops you having to think about it. The “teens” look like ugly words in my opinion anyway.
And something you missed out, I think, is attribution. The web was built with hyperlinks to contextualise and add depth and attribution – and too many people ignore that. Tumblr lets people “reblog” and that works well, but it is far too common to see one blog picking up an artist (without PR influence), and then within minutes there are tens of others posts on that same artist and not mentioning or linking back to the original. I’m not trying to make the point of ownership or anything here, more that such a link lets the reader find out more about the artist and how you formed your opinion. Just a thought anyway.
Good point Tim, although just because some buzz blog lept to get the first post up, with no editorial, research or effort, means they barely deserve all the links and traffic back to them. I know the web allows easy attribution via a hyperlink, but I’m not sure that traditional journalism ever stated, “we found this artist at a competitor’s publication“.
I figure that if I’ve discovered or been first to an artist then that’s cool, but it doesn’t mean I want every other article for the rest of time to credit me. The credit is in the discovery and if someone finds that artist by visiting my site then that’s reward enough for me and ultimately the artist. I guess it’s about the music not the kudos.
Chasing kudos is one such driver for churnalism and buzz blogging, which actually seems to weaken blogs respect in my opinion. One of the reasons I created this style guide was an attempt to improve blogging as a whole, not so much for those buzz blogs, but the ones that are trying to do at least some editorial.
We live in a ‘look-at-me’ culture that seems to be very self-obsessed and insecure and unfortunately music blogs have become an arena where this is shown up, usually via buzz blogs. As people race to be seen to be first to something, or to look like they’re ‘in the loop’, we get blogs that churn out the same rubbish, with no focus on writing or quality or intelligence or opinion or care. It makes professional journalists and traditional media look at the blogging world and dismiss it as amateur and second rate, but yet with some blogs we see they’re influential and respected.
I know blogging is amateur at heart, which is fine, but if people hop around a load of poorly-delivered blogs then they’ll eventually switch off. I’d prefer for blogging to grow, not fade away, but the more pointless buzz blogs there are the more damage is done. As Robin from Breaking More Waves recently posted, there seems to be two camps with music blogs, those that churn out posts quickly with no real quality and everyone else. It would be great if we could definitively label lazy, insecure blogging in an entirely separate camp to our own once and for all.
Oh I’m far from saying everyone writing about a band should link back to the first blog to publish on them – I’m just saying that if you have read a post and liked the music and then gone straight to writing up your own post on that band then a hat tip is a nice way to show the reason for you writing the post. I’m with you on most of that rant really.
PS I think we should name those lazy bloggers as “cloggers” for clogging up the interwebs. There you have it – term coined.
Should have put a rule about length. Nothing to long because people don’t have much patience on the net. Feel like you guys are very guilty of that. You put up a song and write 5 paragraphs about it. That’s way too much for a single post on a music blog. Something concise would be much better for the readers I think. Love the blog, just think this is one of the faults here.
Yeah, I’m definitely guilty of not being concise enough, so that’s all fair enough. However, nobody is forced to read it all if they can’t be bothered.
I barely ever just list one song either and have often heard more to gain context even when I’ve only ever listed a couple. I tend not to write about just the one song either, but I focus on the actual band, or the album, or the story.
I know blogging is more of a quick fix (although I don’t see why) so people might prefer less editorial, but I don’t engage with the idea that people don’t have the patience to read a few hundred words. How do they read books? If we have a generation of people too impatient to read then that’s a very bad thing. I tend to consider that it’s not me that writes too much, it’s actually people that do not read enough.
I tend to try and be informative, with the facts, details, descriptions, opinions and I tend to hang the article on an arc/story. Blogs that just state “here’s another song I like” have no real voice and they always leave me wanting to know more about the artist, such as, who they are, where they’re from, who sings, their context in the broader scheme of music, what releases they’ve had to date, what releases are due, upcoming gigs and tours, etc.
I put the time and effort into handing that sort of information out. I’m the opposite of churnalism and empty ‘buzz blogging’ and hopefully that gives visitors a reason to return to my blog over other peoples.
Hope that’s a lengthy enough response for you? Hello? Are you still there? lol
In all seriousness you raise an interesting point and one I’m aware of, but if it was only about handing out music I’d just put links to artists on my Twitter feed and save myself a shit-load of time. I actually enjoy the research, insight and the creative writing and I’m sure some people enjoy reading it too. As I said above, at least I give people the option to know more, if they want to.
I agree that people should be able to read more… and I also personally like to read longer post to gleam more info about the artists/song/etc. But theres still a little bit in me that thinks sometimes it’s a little overkill if you write too much… some blogs I know of that do this (not just talking about this one)… when I read it, I almost feel like they think they HAVE to write alot and fill in the space with a vast amount of writing. I think a well-thought out, maybe 2 solid paragraphs is the perfect length for a music posting blog. Either way… cheers and obviously i’ll still be coming around to this one and many others…
I’m not sure I agree with you about the issue of length. I remember buying the Nme and Melody Maker, another music newspaper which also came out weekly , I read them pretty much cover to cover and find the opportunity to read in depth much more satisfying. Context, references and opinion make music journalism a valuable asset to those interested in finding new artists and that takes detail and more words not less. I am sure there are blogs that only manage a few lines but I don’t read them. I think the short, quick fix sound bite culture is part of the dumbing down process that we should all fight against
I have to say, we , or is it “I” am/ are guilty of writing over long occasionally verbose posts on occasion, but from my point of view I’d much rather read something from somebody who is passionate about the music they are writing about as opposed to the copy and paste brigade, or “I was first for the sake of it.”
I’d rather read something that has wit, intelligence offers some insight, entertains and maybe one which I can glean some new info from. I came across one the other day, which posted the sound cloud link and wrote “this is something to get excited about.” That was it.Wow. About as useful as chocolate tea cosy. The ones I, and I assume other readers come back to are the ones that put the effort in, have entertaining articles, have their own voice and help me discover new music. Having a laugh helps too!
I guess it is difficult not to call things “shimmering” at times, I’m certainly guilty of that one, I haven’t as yet used the old chestnut “a cosmic Cathedral of sound” yet, but you never know. Gratuitous language, yup I have been known to, *shame*
I hope the great blogs prevail over the erm, not so great.
Great post. I have a longstanding hatred of cliche ridden writing. Some blogs read like they’ve been written by Gary Lineker.
Most importantly I think blogs need to find and develop their own voice and personality. In most non-music blog settings, writers seem more adept at creating & delivering some personality whereas a lot of music bloggers (though by no means all) seem content with a paragraph of SEO attractive blurb and an mp3. Boo. I guess I’m just echoing Mr Von Pip and subsequently having no independent voice…
Pretty much agree with everything Andy Von Pip said – all of my favourite blogs have some sort of wit, intelligence and offer insight. Most importantly they entertain in their own right and are knowledgable. However I’m not fully against ‘buzz blogs’ they’re always going to exsist and are popular with many people who just want a quick fix of the latest ‘hot’ new tracks or fashionable bands of the moment on a daily basis – but I guess they’re not what my blog is about – when I feature buzzy bands I always try to add some thought or (and this is important for me) move the conversation on about the artist. I’d rather have a smaller readership but one who likes to actually have a conversation about music rather than just being a passive listener / viewer.
To be honest I’m not so bothered about great grammar and if you use we or I and some of the other issues you put in your post. For me it’s just about generating some interest in the music or subject featured. (Breaking More Waves used to use ‘I’ but now uses ‘we’ – for a variety of reasons but mainly because although there is one writer (me) other members of my household occasionaly have an input (usually me asking ‘who does this remind you of’ or giving an alternate view to my own which I sometimes build in to my text) so I use we.
Ultimately blogs are the creation of their authors and everyone is different – so I’m not sure if anyone is going to follow this ‘style guide’ but it gives the opportunity for an interesting discussion , which I guess is half the point.
Very interesting piece that illuminates the problems of those without professional training entering what was once a solely professional environment. I do think that the internet was supposed to be egalitarian, to be an open space where people communicate without constrictions of style. In the areas of music journalism presumably the vernacular is part of that communication. Certainly most music bloggers talk to their own community or congregation where language that may not sit well in the written form offers a greater level of understanding and therefore communication if at the same time excluding those outside that community. I certainly agree with all the points you raise but I can see a situation where this might not be necessary. The dumbing down of the written word is only following in the footsteps of visual imagery where now no consideration of visual language is acceptable. The ubiquitous use of phone cameras producing images that do little more than say ‘this happened’ are sought after by the print and broadcast media to the exclusion of those by professional photographers. I support your intentions but these are sad times for anyone wishing to maintain quality.
It was just a guide, not a rule book, so I accept that not all of them are necessary or applicable, but at least it makes people think.
As someone who has grown up in an age surrounded by technology, such as digital photography, computers and the internet, I still care for quality and intelligence, so it seems a shame that it’s allowed society to dumb down.
Its probably a losing battle, but in my attempts to maintain a certain quality I can at least know that I tried. I hate to imagine what things will be like in 100 years, but if I complain I’ll just sound like an old man, so I’ll just do my best to maintain some level of standards.
Thanks
Mike
If you are one person, why would you refer to yourself as ‘we’? It doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.
It’s because you are representing your blog, almost as a brand. All traditional publications do this.
There is a grey area though…
The question is, do you consider blogging to be the same as Gonzo journalism, attributed to the likes of Hunter S Thompson, which sets out to write about a subject from the point of view of the person experiencing it? Gonzo journalism is almost as much about the person writing it as it is the subject.
Or is music blogging more like traditional journalism, using a detached writing style that involves facts or quotations that can be verified by third parties. It is impersonal and more about the subject being reported.
In my opinion blogs sit somewhere between the two, so it’s really up to you (this style guide was just a guide after all). The best blogs are delivered with a voice, so they’re personal in that respect, but they are often all about the subject, not the reporter, so that’s more traditional. You can always switch between the two styles too, writing in the traditional way for the most part, but switching to a Gonzo style when reviewing gigs.
There is no wrong way to do it, but The Recommender chooses to be more like the traditional style. Also, lots of blogs have more than one writer, so you are representing your team when writing, so that deserves a ‘we’ style.
Hope that helps.
Thanks
Mike
As long as nobody else contributed actively to the text/post you don’t represent your team. You represent yourself.
With music more than many other things it’s subjective, but you suggest with that “we” that your opinion is the (objective) consensus of a team. Or you’re a noble that could be another explanation.
Interesting piece Mike, and I think I follow most of these although do step into the cliche boundaries every now and again. As I said before, when you sent a similar, but less complete, guide around SiS it was very useful.
I’ve got a couple of points to add though…
With numbers, I was always taught that you use numbers for numbers bigger than twelve – for example 13 would be written as a number. Not a hard and fast rule by any means, but having a number in your head stops you having to think about it. The “teens” look like ugly words in my opinion anyway.
And something you missed out, I think, is attribution. The web was built with hyperlinks to contextualise and add depth and attribution – and too many people ignore that. Tumblr lets people “reblog” and that works well, but it is far too common to see one blog picking up an artist (without PR influence), and then within minutes there are tens of others posts on that same artist and not mentioning or linking back to the original. I’m not trying to make the point of ownership or anything here, more that such a link lets the reader find out more about the artist and how you formed your opinion. Just a thought anyway.
Good point Tim, although just because some buzz blog lept to get the first post up, with no editorial, research or effort, means they barely deserve all the links and traffic back to them. I know the web allows easy attribution via a hyperlink, but I’m not sure that traditional journalism ever stated, “we found this artist at a competitor’s publication“.
I figure that if I’ve discovered or been first to an artist then that’s cool, but it doesn’t mean I want every other article for the rest of time to credit me. The credit is in the discovery and if someone finds that artist by visiting my site then that’s reward enough for me and ultimately the artist. I guess it’s about the music not the kudos.
Chasing kudos is one such driver for churnalism and buzz blogging, which actually seems to weaken blogs respect in my opinion. One of the reasons I created this style guide was an attempt to improve blogging as a whole, not so much for those buzz blogs, but the ones that are trying to do at least some editorial.
We live in a ‘look-at-me’ culture that seems to be very self-obsessed and insecure and unfortunately music blogs have become an arena where this is shown up, usually via buzz blogs. As people race to be seen to be first to something, or to look like they’re ‘in the loop’, we get blogs that churn out the same rubbish, with no focus on writing or quality or intelligence or opinion or care. It makes professional journalists and traditional media look at the blogging world and dismiss it as amateur and second rate, but yet with some blogs we see they’re influential and respected.
I know blogging is amateur at heart, which is fine, but if people hop around a load of poorly-delivered blogs then they’ll eventually switch off. I’d prefer for blogging to grow, not fade away, but the more pointless buzz blogs there are the more damage is done. As Robin from Breaking More Waves recently posted, there seems to be two camps with music blogs, those that churn out posts quickly with no real quality and everyone else. It would be great if we could definitively label lazy, insecure blogging in an entirely separate camp to our own once and for all.
Rant over.
Thanks
Mike
Oh I’m far from saying everyone writing about a band should link back to the first blog to publish on them – I’m just saying that if you have read a post and liked the music and then gone straight to writing up your own post on that band then a hat tip is a nice way to show the reason for you writing the post. I’m with you on most of that rant really.
PS I think we should name those lazy bloggers as “cloggers” for clogging up the interwebs. There you have it – term coined.
Should have put a rule about length. Nothing to long because people don’t have much patience on the net. Feel like you guys are very guilty of that. You put up a song and write 5 paragraphs about it. That’s way too much for a single post on a music blog. Something concise would be much better for the readers I think. Love the blog, just think this is one of the faults here.
Yeah, I’m definitely guilty of not being concise enough, so that’s all fair enough. However, nobody is forced to read it all if they can’t be bothered.
I barely ever just list one song either and have often heard more to gain context even when I’ve only ever listed a couple. I tend not to write about just the one song either, but I focus on the actual band, or the album, or the story.
I know blogging is more of a quick fix (although I don’t see why) so people might prefer less editorial, but I don’t engage with the idea that people don’t have the patience to read a few hundred words. How do they read books? If we have a generation of people too impatient to read then that’s a very bad thing. I tend to consider that it’s not me that writes too much, it’s actually people that do not read enough.
I tend to try and be informative, with the facts, details, descriptions, opinions and I tend to hang the article on an arc/story. Blogs that just state “here’s another song I like” have no real voice and they always leave me wanting to know more about the artist, such as, who they are, where they’re from, who sings, their context in the broader scheme of music, what releases they’ve had to date, what releases are due, upcoming gigs and tours, etc.
I put the time and effort into handing that sort of information out. I’m the opposite of churnalism and empty ‘buzz blogging’ and hopefully that gives visitors a reason to return to my blog over other peoples.
Hope that’s a lengthy enough response for you? Hello? Are you still there? lol
In all seriousness you raise an interesting point and one I’m aware of, but if it was only about handing out music I’d just put links to artists on my Twitter feed and save myself a shit-load of time. I actually enjoy the research, insight and the creative writing and I’m sure some people enjoy reading it too. As I said above, at least I give people the option to know more, if they want to.
Many thanks
Mike
I agree that people should be able to read more… and I also personally like to read longer post to gleam more info about the artists/song/etc. But theres still a little bit in me that thinks sometimes it’s a little overkill if you write too much… some blogs I know of that do this (not just talking about this one)… when I read it, I almost feel like they think they HAVE to write alot and fill in the space with a vast amount of writing. I think a well-thought out, maybe 2 solid paragraphs is the perfect length for a music posting blog. Either way… cheers and obviously i’ll still be coming around to this one and many others…
I’m not sure I agree with you about the issue of length. I remember buying the Nme and Melody Maker, another music newspaper which also came out weekly , I read them pretty much cover to cover and find the opportunity to read in depth much more satisfying. Context, references and opinion make music journalism a valuable asset to those interested in finding new artists and that takes detail and more words not less. I am sure there are blogs that only manage a few lines but I don’t read them. I think the short, quick fix sound bite culture is part of the dumbing down process that we should all fight against
Pretty much agree with all of this
I have to say, we , or is it “I” am/ are guilty of writing over long occasionally verbose posts on occasion, but from my point of view I’d much rather read something from somebody who is passionate about the music they are writing about as opposed to the copy and paste brigade, or “I was first for the sake of it.”
I’d rather read something that has wit, intelligence offers some insight, entertains and maybe one which I can glean some new info from. I came across one the other day, which posted the sound cloud link and wrote “this is something to get excited about.” That was it.Wow. About as useful as chocolate tea cosy. The ones I, and I assume other readers come back to are the ones that put the effort in, have entertaining articles, have their own voice and help me discover new music. Having a laugh helps too!
I guess it is difficult not to call things “shimmering” at times, I’m certainly guilty of that one, I haven’t as yet used the old chestnut “a cosmic Cathedral of sound” yet, but you never know. Gratuitous language, yup I have been known to, *shame*
I hope the great blogs prevail over the erm, not so great.
Cheers
Andy
Great post. I have a longstanding hatred of cliche ridden writing. Some blogs read like they’ve been written by Gary Lineker.
Most importantly I think blogs need to find and develop their own voice and personality. In most non-music blog settings, writers seem more adept at creating & delivering some personality whereas a lot of music bloggers (though by no means all) seem content with a paragraph of SEO attractive blurb and an mp3. Boo. I guess I’m just echoing Mr Von Pip and subsequently having no independent voice…
Pretty much agree with everything Andy Von Pip said – all of my favourite blogs have some sort of wit, intelligence and offer insight. Most importantly they entertain in their own right and are knowledgable. However I’m not fully against ‘buzz blogs’ they’re always going to exsist and are popular with many people who just want a quick fix of the latest ‘hot’ new tracks or fashionable bands of the moment on a daily basis – but I guess they’re not what my blog is about – when I feature buzzy bands I always try to add some thought or (and this is important for me) move the conversation on about the artist. I’d rather have a smaller readership but one who likes to actually have a conversation about music rather than just being a passive listener / viewer.
To be honest I’m not so bothered about great grammar and if you use we or I and some of the other issues you put in your post. For me it’s just about generating some interest in the music or subject featured. (Breaking More Waves used to use ‘I’ but now uses ‘we’ – for a variety of reasons but mainly because although there is one writer (me) other members of my household occasionaly have an input (usually me asking ‘who does this remind you of’ or giving an alternate view to my own which I sometimes build in to my text) so I use we.
Ultimately blogs are the creation of their authors and everyone is different – so I’m not sure if anyone is going to follow this ‘style guide’ but it gives the opportunity for an interesting discussion , which I guess is half the point.