HEADLINERS

is it okay to criticize Taylor Swift?

i mean, i think we all agree that having opinions on things is generally acceptable. but criticizing Taylor Swift comes with unique risks, like mobilizing an army of diehard fans to destroy your whole career and possibly the an entire planet.

we can joke, but the Paste’s review that thrashed Taylor’s 31 track, two hour release was credited to “Paste Staff” because the last time they trashed a Swift album, the writer literally received death threats.

but for all the hype and praise Taylor’s past efforts have received, this album has been deemed “mid.” my personal take: i got 8 songs in before i realized that i had no idea where each song began or ended. this album melded together like a pack of Swedish Fish that was left in the sun for too long.

but my thoughts are beside the point. here’s a roundup of some other publications:

• The sharpest moments of “The Tortured Poets Department” would be even more piercing in the absence of excess, but instead the clutter lingers, while Swift holds an unlit match. — NYT

• What’s hollow about The Tortured Poets Department is that the real torture is just how unlivable these songs really are. - Paste

• Tortured Poets’ extended Anthology edition runs over two hours, and even in the abridged version, its sense of sprawl creeps down to the song level, where Swift’s writing is, at best, playfully unbridled and, at worst, conspicuously wanting for an editor. - Pitchfork

• “…please know that after funneling 19 of its 31 tracks through my headphones on Friday morning, my phone died, as if by its own volition.” - WaPo

i hope these writers survive.

now of course there was plenty of praise going around but a part of me can’t help but think that praise has been offered with a gun to the writers’ heads. (i know i’m being dramatic.)

so what does all this mean? nothing. to be honest, none of this was all that surprising. when the most famous person in the world releases an album, people will pick their hills to die on. but i’ll continue to not care very much and just be fascinated by it all.

what the Ticketmaster legal battle means for you

we can keep this short. we all know that Live Nation and Ticketmaster are operations that are evil and care waaaaaay more about dollar signs than artists or their “weak, pathetic, piece-of-shit customers.” - Ticketmaster board member probably.

so the fact that the justice department is pursuing antitrust litigation was met with the cheers of people across the land.

in case you missed it, here is why Ticketmaster fucking sucks chunks, man:

• they use their tentacles to lock all of the biggest venues into exclusivity agreements, leaving consumers with fewer ticket vendor choices

• their stranglehold on the market prevents other ticketing platforms from ever getting a foothold

• their monopoly allows them to subsist off of a shitty product that is easy to manipulate and cheats consumers off of face-value-tickets

• their monopoly allows them to charge ludicrous fees

so what can we expect if this whole thing works out?

• higher payouts for artists and venues

• less junk fees for customers and ticketholders

• more incentives to clamp down on scalpers and fraudsters

• a better product that works and ensures equity in the ticket purchasing process

let’s keep our fingers crossed this whole thing works out and we can break up one of the most reviled companies in the world.

click here for » ten good songs « because i didn’t have time to get to the album covers this week, sorry fam :(

Reminder: all typos and inaccurate hyperlinks are intentional!