Reviews reporting thread

If some negitive PA reviews are coddling then I'd hate to see what an all out assault looks like.

But that's another story.

Edited by SteveG - April 10 2021 at 05:50

Many members, both visable and invisible, agreed with your concern. How about we let it drop now that the review in question has been altered to your satisfaction.

BTW, I like Magus/The Winter Tree. Cool stuff!

Edited by Shadowyzard - April 10 2021 at 04:38

UMUR wrote: If someone ever wants to censor one of my reviews I hope they´ll contact me in good time before anything is done. I think it´s disrespectful to a reviewer who maybe spends hours writing a review, to have someone edit it without their consent. Personally I would be furious. When did it become the norm that artists can dictate what a reviewer should write about their music??? The word plagarize is a strong word, and the artist may find it offensive that someone thinks their music sounds a lot like a more known artists (in this case the mighty Floyd), but come on...it´s not a crime and I think the artist is a little thin skinned here. I´ll go lenghts for freedom of speech and freedom of expression, and I take offense to the fact that someone would even consider making edits to an otherwise valid and well written review.

Free speech has it's limits, especially when it encroaches on areas of defamation.

If someone ever wants to censor one of my reviews I hope they´ll contact me in good time before anything is done. I think it´s disrespectful to a reviewer who maybe spends hours writing a review, to have someone edit it without their consent. Personally I would be furious. When did it become the norm that artists can dictate what a reviewer should write about their music??? The word plagarize is a strong word, and the artist may find it offensive that someone thinks their music sounds a lot like a more known artists (in this case the mighty Floyd), but come on...it´s not a crime and I think the artist is a little thin skinned here. I´ll go lenghts for freedom of speech and freedom of expression, and I take offense to the fact that someone would even consider making edits to an otherwise valid and well written review.


Edited by UMUR - April 10 2021 at 03:31

Thank you, I appreciate it!
A

You're welcome. Hopefully an admin will see these posts and have an opinion on this.

No one here, save the album reviewer, is even suggesting that you sound like Floyd. We are only using that comparison as an example in our discussion. That said, it's still a subjective opinion and the reviewer is entitled to it. The use of the word plagerism is the problem, as it denotes an objective legal opinion as opposed to a subjective artistic opinion.

Edited by SteveG - April 09 2021 at 06:36

Raff wrote: My own 2 cents, for what they're worth... It's clear to me, as a non-native speaker of English, and occasional translator/interpreter, that the author of the review meant something else - such as "imitating", which does not have the same potential for legal trouble that "plagiarizing" has. However, that's the word he used (misspelling it as well), and I agree with the artist and other users that it needs to go. The rest of the review - which is not bad at all, in purely formal terms - should remain as it is. Not having heard the album in question, I don't know how similar the music is to that of PF. However, I can tell you that in my reviewing days I've come across albums that sounded so similar to another band/artist as to be virtually indistinguishable. However, I don't believe you can accuse anyone of actual plagiarism unless another work is actually reproduced word-for-word (or, in this case, note-for-note).

I agree Raff. Sounding like an artist is not the same as plagerism. I've dealt a lot with this phenomenon when I did A&R work for Chrysilas Records, amongst others. Legal problems were never the issue, just the "crime" of sounding like a clone of another, and in many cases, well known artist.

Edited by SteveG - April 09 2021 at 05:48