Metal Magazines: How honest are they?

[JayKeeley]

Magazines sell advertising space. It's a huge source of revenue for them, and the only reason we're paying $6 instead of $30 is because the price is offset by the promotional ads.

So don't the advertisers have some influence over the magazine content -- that is, the band interviews and reviews?

As with radio stations, the play lists are determined based on which sponsor has the largest investment, or which record labels fall within the portfolio of the holding companies (see: clear channel). There is a definite bias.

Can this concept apply to magazines? I'm just wondering how many interviews and reviews aren't just ads for certain bands/labels through some means of backhanded payment/reward scheme.

Take BW&BK -- they might as well work for Century Media & Nuclear Blast. Just look at their top 20 list from 2005. If BW&BK started SLAMMING CM and NB bands, do you think they would still continue to buy advertising space?

 

[cthulufhtagn]

i think whether they like it or not, "big" mags like terrorizer, metal hammer, BW&BK are all beholden (to varying degrees) to the companies that buy ad space. which is part of the reason why i find online reviews appealing, both by professional reviewers and average listeners (metal archives, et al).

still no judge better than your own ears.

 

[lurch70]

good thread, this will turn out into a heated discussion for sure.

of course there will be preferential treatment given to companies that advertise with a particular magazine, even if it is not "communicated" between the advertiser and the magazine ... it is, probably, internally taken into consideration when writing anything about said co.

this applies to any type of magazine or type of media.

some things i found out recently as I was looking for ad space for a client in different media.

Magazine advertising is one of the most expensive ways to promote ... full color one page ad in a pretty small business magazine such as Business 2.0 is about $60K for 1 issue.

On the other hand, surprisingly enough, talking to a media broker that sells TV spots, you can actually buy a 30 second commercial spot on a major network (CBS, NBC, ABC) during the 11pm news for about $2K ... of course 1 ad would not yield jack shit.

But back on topic, if you ever listened to Howard Stern, he always kissed advertisers asses, unashammed ...

 

[Eminor]

I'm not really sure, but I get the feeling that much of it rests in the hands of the editor. Reviewers may be tempted to give some preferential treatment to the hand that feeds, but I'd guess that for writers of most mags, that wouldn't be a dominating concern. But editors have the power to cut out some of the swipes, raise scores, etc. And they're a lot closer to the business side of it.

 

[lurch70]

they really have to hold on to advertisers by any means ... pure sales and small circulations would no way pay for the costs associated with the magazine ... it merely pays for the distribution costs.

 

[Eminor]

To raise a related question: How upset do you think labels get about unflattering reviews? I've heard bands and labels say plenty of times that any publicity is good publicity. Obviously, you're looking for a thumbs up, but not getting it isn't exactly a tragedy. I guess a poor review in a mag like Terrorizer carries substantially more weight though.
On the web, a bad review can actually earn the album a lot more attention, as people continue to leave comments about it, keeping it in the spotlight.

 

[Krilons Resa]

Fuck them. I dont trust them ONE FUCKING BIT.

 

[NAD]

You Read Metal Magazines, You're Fucking Dumb

Well okay, I pick up a Terrorizer about once a year. But most of that shit is teenybopper bullshit, Tiger Beat with more leather.

 

[Krilons Resa]

Yeah, plus they cover the worst bands anyway. There is still a "mainstream" within the underground community. So to speak.

 

[lurch70]

with the advent of the internet, I am not sure how they even exist anymore ... by the time they publish anything it's already old news.

 

[NAD]

haha, do they still do those one magazines with like 90 posters of Lars in a bathtub?

"Roaringly infectious riff-surge that skids into a skewed melodic shimmer... a furious fist-wield." --Rip, on COC's Wiseblood.

Seriously. What assholes.

 

[Ellestin]

I haven't bought a mag in years, but some of the French toilet rolls I used to get certainly didn't escape a heavy "big label" bias, I've never seen a Century Media or Holy Records release receiving less than 7/10, no matter how shitty it was.

Also it's fairly obvious how a critical understanding of the music doesn't even take place. How many reviews have I read that were basically paraphrasing the promo sheet?

Hell, I'm so glad the Internet exists at least in this respect. Should I base my purchase solely on the "monthly selections" of the main press titles - as I know many many people still do - I would be a fucking loser at metal - even more than I am already, that is.

 

[Krilons Resa]

Hell, I'm so glad the Internet exists at least in this respect. Should I base my purchase solely on the "monthly selections" of the main press titles - as I know many many people still do - I would be a fucking loser at metal - even more than I am already, that is.

QFT

 

[NAD]

I'd still be buying albums based on how cool the album art was were it not for the internet.

I sorta miss that honestly.

 

[Conspicuously Absent]

after discovering a handful of review sites on the internet, and RC.... i've come to realize that the magazines just aren't worht the money anymore.

 

[J.]

pick up a terrorizer every once in a while to see what bullshit "avant garde" dung heap is being praised these days. they never cover my fave bands.

 

[Necromunchkin]

Something I've also noticed is how those who work in magazines are often employed by various labels as well. While I realize that this may be more due to the nature of the industry; both in terms of a person wanting to be involved in the scene at multiple levels as well as make a living in the process, I wonder how this might lend to bias. Even if a writer, editor, whoever was employed at the magazine first, wouldn't working for Century Media, The End Records, et al., put a natural pressure on the person to promote bands for that label via interviews, positive reviews, advertising breaks, et al?

 

[Dick Sirloin]

I think it's funny when a writer fawns all over a band in an interview, then in the same magazine the reviewers give that band's album a 4/10 or something.

Man, back from like 1998-2002 (before I discovered the internet), Metal Maniacs was my ONLY way to discover underground heavy metal. I'm sure it's the same for all you old timers (not with MM in particular).

 

[Necromunchkin]

It's true. (though for me it was really 97-2001). This is when Mike G. and Jeff Wagner were the editors and MM was pretty much the only magazine we had a hope of getting in the sticks.

 

[Thanatopsis123]

So don't the advertisers have some influence over the magazine content -- that is, the band interviews and reviews?

Of course. And even aside from advertisers, they don't want to piss off any band or label to lose access to news and interviews. Also, I find most popular media hardly ever goes against hype. If something is hyped big it'll get a great review most of the time even if it turns out to be an utter disappointment. They try to anticipate reaction and then print that prediction.

Posts 8-10 are spot on by the way.