The Beat(portal) stops

You may or may not have noticed this -  actually, you probably haven't noticed it because it only happened a week or so ago  - but I'm no longer reviewing for Beatportal, Beatport's online 'magazine'. Beatportal approached me last year to review for them. At the time, they were in start-up mode and said that for the first few months, there would be no money involved. Given that the Beatportal project was being headed up by a former colleague of mine from DJ Magazine, I agreed to work under these conditions. Once the project kicked in, I got paid for my reviews, albeit at half the rate one normally gets for print magazine reviews, which, as anyone who has ever reviewed techno knows, isn't a hell of a lot of money. But I felt I was doing it for the right reasons, and submitted my reviews, some positive, some critcial, but always constuctive if critical. Then, a few months ago, Beatportal asked me if I could submit reviews in a rolling format instead of in one go once a month as had been the case. I thought this was a good idea, even though I was a bit surprised when asked to only review releases that I recommended, eg, no more critical reviews. I was also asked to submit the reviews myself, in much the same way that I update this blog, something I had no problem doing. A few weeks ago, I got a strange email from my former DJ Mag colleague at Beatportal with the header 'Blogging for Beatportal'. I have the email somewhere in my mail folders, and to save my former colleague, who I still think is a decent guy, any blushes, I'll summarise its content. Basically, Beatportal were doing away with all of its reviewers, but wanted to retain my services and get me to blog for them, and pay me more. It sounded too good to be true. But here's the sting in the tail: they wanted me to blog from this site: after the first few lines of each post, there would be a link to the full text on Beatportal, where all manner of players and branded images could be displayed. Or to put it another way: Beatportal wanted to take over this site (or maybe just its content) and pay me the grand total of $500 a month (the fee I was going to get to blog for them) to do so. I politely turned down the offer and my former colleague expressed disappointment that I felt Beatportal was not an independent outlet. How could it be? It's owned by a company whose main business is selling music: surely all the glowing reviews I was encouraged to submit to Beatportal wasn't for the good of my health? I have always maintained that this site, like any good blog, should be independent. I don't run it to make money, so was I wrong to turn down the cash and allow it to be turned into a Beatport satellite? I feel I made the right decision -  what do you think?

Comments

[Steve]

I think you did the right thing. There are other types of paid sponsorships which I'm fine with; but selecting the content you talk about and pulling all the readers onto its shitty blog is a raw deal to say the least.

[hum3]

That's a mighty tempting offer for you - and it's also tempting for this reader to rant on about the ever-growing commercialism in electronic music.

But I won't do that.

It's not so clear-cut and probably a bit too easy to always see business as the kryptonite of integrity. (Not to mention that most journalists don't have the luxury to pass up on good paydays - to that I can sadly relate.)

Still, I have to say that when it comes to journalism - even more so than music - mixing it up with commercial interests is a very slippery slope. Especially on a blog/opinion level with some very truthful content.

Based on your stated reasons, I'd say you've made the right decision. Though I would've respected it if you'd decided otherwise: thanx for keeping this blog pure.

[kuri]

ultimately i think it all depends on how much independence you want to retain. if the purpose of the blog was/is to give forthright opinions on music then you made the right choice. i can definitely see how the $ can sway but not being able to give critical analysis is always going to be at the detriment of honest journalism.

[James]

Thanks for posting this - I've always wondered how the machinery works when music blogs start pointing towards sponsorship. You made the right call - although what a strange and difficult decision to be forced to make!

I think it was the right choice - not because of any of lame knee-jerk 'money corrupts art' reaction, but simply because there's an odd element of deception at play here - reading an independent, personal blog that continually points me towards a commercial site would be misleading and frustrating, and I'm surprised this is how Beatport is approaching its marketing.

It sounds like someone over there read an article with words like 'guerilla marketing' and 'Web 3.0' and is going about it in a terrible and lazy way - instead, their proposal sounds more like infiltration.

That said, I think it'd be perfectly fine if you were to have, say, a weekly post along the lines of 'This Week on Beatportal' or something that made it very clear it was sponsored content. There's no reason Test shouldn't make a buck, especially since 1) you don't post mp3s and, more importantly, 2) you provide one of the best voices in techno discourse these days.

But it's tricky to attach critical thinking about music to a business that wants to sell as much of it as possible - and I'm surprised Beatport would make a show of it. Perhaps if they took a more curatorial approach (like Other Music or Halcyon's online shops) then it could work out nicely.

Anyway, I really appreciate that you're keeping this site in good form!

[kenny]

Tough decision to make. I don't think I could have begrudged you making a commercial move, as being a journo can be tough going, but I'm glad the blog ain't changing in that direction :)

[Benjamin]

I appreciate your decision to remain independent. Thank you.

[tiddlerz]

Fuck them, full stop.
Great site, lovely to use, almost perfect.
But changing prices from $ to € without even a polite email to all the affected customers?
Thats bullshit. Charging the same price for tunes in £ as $ when a £ is worth 2$ Scandalous. So fuck them. I still use it but buy whatever i can elsewhere.

[sergej]

Respect for decision - and thnx for sharing insight info - its sad how some corporations underestimate others people work (at least they are trying too)

[PC/dysconnect]

Beatportal = Boostportal, simple as that. You did the right thing.

All this boosting, high-fiving and advertorial has a potentialy very damaging effect on electronic music criticism, and it should be something that 'we', as people who care about the music, try to distance ourselves from, descry and resist. I reckon you've done that here, so thank you.

Some months ago I had a back/forth w/ Ronan F on his blog about boosterism in electronic music criticism. Here's the post I wrote. I stand by this:

"Where criticism becomes a stranger, the net effect is like the guy who wants to talk about the violence of the drug trade while you’re racking lines.

Sure, if the release is a minor or irrelevant EP, just ignore it, but if it’s a major release, it stinks and you don’t say so, then you’re being derelict in your duty as a trusted filter of culture.

If you’re always praising everything, the net effect is boosterism, kind of ‘Hooray for Everything’.

Imagine if news and current affairs people didn’t report on anything they thought might upset people… oh, hang on…

Well, imagined if the few who still did suddenly stopped?

The fact that you’re writing about music does take this out of the realm of ‘life and death’, but it’s not categorically different.

The effect otherwise is that people who are critical are seen as a ‘downer’ and need to either take their pill or stop bringing the loved up chums off theirs. This is not a stance I want to support for the music I love.

If you love the form and you find a bad example, tear it to shreds. Anything else would just be disrespectful."

I see the reactions to this when I write a review that's not considered sufficiently glowing for the fanboy circle. You're *expected* to big up the latest releases.

Nick Davies writes of the process of what he calls 'churnalism' in the news media in his book 'Flat Earth News' (check: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Flat-Earth-News-Award-winning-Distortion/dp/0701181451) .This is a *huge* problem. On the most basic level, we need good information, and we don't get it.

It's very difficult to provide readers with 'frank and fearless' (re)views on music, and this is a field where there's far less power/money involved than, say, WMD or an election. And then, on top of everything, if you want to say what you think AND 'get paid to do the wild thing'... now you're dreaming :)

Anyway, anyway. Just my twelve cents.

[theUbiq]

Wow, $500 is like, 27 euros... Is Richie Hawtin involved with Beatport?

[tom/pipecock]

with any outlet other than your own, it is all about being comfortable with the arrangement being offered. in this case, the arrangement was to essentially take your own outlet and use it to give them your name recognition. it is easy to see how that arrangement would be uncomfortable! but that is what they want to pay you for, not for the content of your writing. had they wanted your content, they could have offered you a blog on their site separate from Test, or they could have continued using your (and others') reviews. but what they want for their money is credibility from your site, your name and your opinion. good call not giving it to them.

[lerosa]

well, the moment this or any other blogs starts looking like a paid advert people will cop on and stop taking it seriously. the same way people laugh reading those boomkat 'reviews'. As long as you have got your integrity people will respect you, compromise, and well, you loose both the readers and probably some self respect. so I think you did well to stick to your principles.

[Brophy]

Hey, just a quick post to say thanks for all the support on the decision I made. PC/Dysconnect - that book is on my shortlist of books to read as I see the way that news gathering has been corrupted by the 'dark arts' of the PR industry. It has destroyed news journalism - hopefully my decision will mean that this site will remain a place for honest criticism and writing about electronic music. Tom, the funny thing is, I had offered to maintain a separate blog at Beatportal, but no, they wanted to use this one - funny that...

[peter vh]

respect for reporting on this issue with integrity and for the decision made.

[zuckermann]

I don't know what happenend to that trackback, but since it doesn't work for some reason or another, here you go with my blog about the matter:
http://www.stalking-gogo-girls.net/independent-music-industry-now-also-kills-its-customer-base/

Cheers Zuckermann

[chrisdisco]

i might be a bit late on this one, but just to echo the comments: tough, but right decision. keep it up. respect.

[Minotronic]

not sure if i get it right... i guess everybody is looking for formulas right now, and they're not always good. in my opinion, Beatportal's proposal needs some fixing.

It's totally insane to keep the "positive reviews only" clause if it is linked from your blog. Simply because you'll quickly lose all credibility, and that would be of no interest to beatportal. They buy your talent, and your respect, if you lose them, they pay for nothing.

They could have bought you whatever content they want - the positive reviews-, obviously without hijacking your blog that we like the way it is.

I read bportal for some reasons, but I read Test for others. And can't understand bportal did not see that that way, they got it sooo wrong. We're not the easy bunch of mass-media readers, and they know that, we're not talking Britney here.

I like it when everybody wins.
Electronic people of the world, Unite! Beatportal, call back, try a new model to attract talent.

You've probably made the best decision though. Hurt, it's what you heart told you.

[Martin Dust]

Classic biz mistake is to believe you can buy this kind of shit. tsk!

They should just lower their prices and give better offers - simple I would have thought.