For bands, the idea of hosted listening parties scales really well, as the bigger the band, the less the need for proximity for the event to still be full of excitement. If U2 did listening parties for bloggers for the album before it came out, they’d cover the web with reviews, with excitement, and it’d cost them a fraction of what it costs to fly all the world’s music press to one place for a press conference… they could even devolve it further into a house party thing. take it right back to grassroots. It’s all about knowing your audience and taking some risks.

I think we also need to foster an enviroment where we can disassociate the art from the artist, somewhat, and also from those marketing it. I really didn’t like Watchmen, but am still so pleased that Dan’s marketing campaign worked so well. I like Dan Light a lot, I respect his forward thinking, innovative approach, and his love for the original graphic novel, so am not in anyway feeling that my opinion is invalidated by the success of the film, or that his success should be diminished by me not getting it. Art is art, not science

On the other hand, I always pay to go to gigs – I have to want to go to see a band play. A friend of mine is a jazz promoter, and I won’t let her give me free tickets – why would I want to go to something just because it was free?

(Interestingly, this doesn’t intrude into other aspects of my life, where I think free is good!)

On the business side, I would focus my product towards the sections that would be receptive. IE, Rolling Stone would slag something like Led Zeppelin, but Guitar Mag would love it. Etc etc. So, targeting marketing segments is important.

Also, I haven’t seen the Watchmen yet, but it looks like a nerds’ paradise, so I am excited to see it.

I think the fact that you’re concerned about these questions means you’re unlikely to descend into bullying

I guess the part of bullying that can happy on a blog is that of someone ‘stronger’ picking on someone ‘weaker’ – as the example I gave about up and coming musicians.

My thinking now is that my review of the film would end up having so many qualifications and caveats as to be effectively useless. I didn’t like it, for myriad reasons, but in talking to people who know the book there’s a ‘reason’ for almost all of them. Not one of them that I’ve heard makes the film any better, or the bits I found to be morally/ethically dubious any less so, but they would have to be mentioned due to their now providing the shape and context for my feelings towards the film.

Also, the bloke from the New Yorker review said prettty much what I wanted to say, but with more authority

I make a point of not talking specifically about bad music (though will talk generally about things I like or dislike..) – when I remember; I do have occasional lapses in which I bitch about certain bands, but they’re always big enough for it not to matter

I still haven’t worked out why I feel differently about film… It does somehow feel like something ‘critique-able’ in a way that a bad record doesn’t. Bad records are generally best ignored.

thanks for commenting – did you read the piece from the Guardian I linked to? would love your thoughts on that.