Taylor’s team threatened critics to give her good reviews

[Ziggy 10,371]

I mean yeah anyone who thinks TSwift is anything less than a shrewd businesswoman is honestly delusional lmao not negating her artistic merits but you can keep both in your mouth and based on the responses to the tweet, her Twitter fans don’t seem to get that lmao

But Twitter fans are kinda a unique breed of unhinged crazy so it’s not unexpected.

[Better Day 5,766]

1 hour ago, SimonBaetens said:

I hope one day everybody understands that everything about her is fake, constructed and only aimed at making as much money as possible. There is no integrity there whatsoever.

Didn’t Gaga not release two albums and a movie within a 3 month period. The music industry is there to make money. God forbid, Taylor Swift releases music. 

[Levine 18,424]

I'm not suprised tbh, as a matter of fact I've been saying this for ages (and not only on the critics but other things too).

 

[SimonBaetens 3,635]

3 minutes ago, Miss Dolly said:

Didn’t Gaga not release two albums and a movie within a 3 month period. The music industry is there to make money. God forbid, Taylor Swift releases music. 

Sure! But Taylor has this persona of being a down to earth girl who writes songs on her guitar in a cottage and loves her fans while she is the most corporate popstar out there (probably tied with Beyoncé) so at this point her whole image is getting close to false advertising. 

[asterius 9]

2 minutes ago, SimonBaetens said:

Sure! But Taylor has this persona of being a down to earth girl who writes songs on her guitar in a cottage and loves her fans while she is the most corporate popstar out there (probably tied with Beyoncé) so at this point her whole image is getting close to false advertising. 

I agree with this. I don’t understand how people don’t spot the artifice in her persona. She has gotten the benefit of the doubt from the gp for years for being this “wholesome down to earth country gal,” when the reality couldn’t be different. 

[NATAH 31,628]

17 minutes ago, Miss Dolly said:

Didn’t Gaga not release two albums and a movie within a 3 month period. The music industry is there to make money. God forbid, Taylor Swift releases music. 

right? people forget that gaga is also in this for the money no matter how much of her art she puts into it and there's nothing wrong with that! it's a capitalist society

there's nothing stopping her from making whatever she wants and just dropping it on soundcloud for free just to express herself

she has the money, connections, talent and equipment

[Controversiaga 7,007]

business is business y'all.  everybody in this industry is calculated and always thinking 4 steps ahead.  its a competitive and cut throat world y'all .

[Mocchi 2,281]

Do you think only Taylor's management do this? 

She is a businesswoman as Gaga and others, but some pople here seem to rage about Taylor cause they don't process very well her success 

[Better Day 5,766]

43 minutes ago, SimonBaetens said:

Sure! But Taylor has this persona of being a down to earth girl who writes songs on her guitar in a cottage and loves her fans while she is the most corporate popstar out there (probably tied with Beyoncé) so at this point her whole image is getting close to false advertising. 

Are you stuck in 2006? Forgetting she has a few genres. Yes Folklore & Evermore was cottagecore music but it was represented the time period we were in. As someone who follows a lot of Taylor Swift fans on Tiktok, I can assure you she does love her fans. 

[Better Day 5,766]

34 minutes ago, NATAH said:

right? people forget that gaga is also in this for the money no matter how much of her art she puts into it and there's nothing wrong with that! it's a capitalist society

there's nothing stopping her from making whatever she wants and just dropping it on soundcloud for free just to express herself

she has the money, connections, talent and equipment

Thank you for furthering my point. 

[StrawberryBlond 13,297]

I'm confused on both parts. The Popcrave one said that the writer was told to slam the album after their publication gave it a D+ score. So, the album was already reviewed? And is a D+ score not considered bad enough and had to be harsher? And as for the reply, what does it mean for an artist to blacklist a music reviewing publication? Will they refuse to send their albums for review? It could just do with more explanation.

But anyway, paid-for reviews happen across basically all the arts, we been knew. I don't know about literature and theatre but certainly music, movies and gaming have been famed for having a whole culture of paid-for positive reviews. In music, I think it's definitely geared around the publication itself. I've always noticed that whenever I read those teeny little reviews of albums in gossip magazines that they never went below a 3/5 score. I think it was a matter of keeping all the fanbases sweet and not sparking any controversy for the sake of showing no bias when the magazine is about so many celebrities. And as for music-specific publications like NME, who have a huge demographic of rock and indie music fans, they won't care if you slam a pop album (in fact, they'll probably relish a negative review of what they deem to be "generic corporate s**t") but they'd be outraged if you slammed a beloved rock group's album and might never buy the magazine again. And as for MetaCritic, those averages are getting higher and higher every year, which is especially evident when it comes to pop albums from females, which used to have to really pull out something amazing to get anywhere near an 80 score. So, publications are always keeping in mind what their readers want to see and catering to that. Which doesn't make for very honest reviews. While it's hard to say for sure how many artists do this, we've all seen amazing critic reviews for albums that had more than a few cringey/bad moments on it or you have to wonder what critics (who are, for the most part, middle-aged/old men), see in a album from a young woman that's very girlie and/or raunchy. I don't know if this will inspire a deluge of critics speaking out about more specific names, though, as they'll be frightened of losing their jobs. Unless they're former writers, like the one mentioned.

1 hour ago, weed said:

What is the consequence of being blacklisted by Taylor's team? She won't give u interviews?

I'm wondering this too. I thought it could be a refusal to give interviews too but then I wondered if it could be refusing to send your album for review in the first place, thereby denying the publication promotion. But wouldn't it look strange when you're a major player in music but your album isn't getting reviewed by several of the most iconic music publications, for example? Like I said, there's too much vagueness going on.

1 hour ago, RudraCNG said:

Big publishers do this in the video games industry, they tell you which score you must give to their games or they won't send you early copies ever again, so this isn't surprising.

I've heard about this. Which could explain why, when gamers get around to playing it themselves, they complain of glitches and all manner of other complaints. I think there was some sort of expose on it some years ago. Seeing as I was never heavily into gaming, I don't know the ins and outs. All I know is that gamers take their hobby very seriously and games are so expensive, so when they feel duped, they'll go nuclear, hence why exaggerating or lying about the quality of the game really shouldn't be a good idea from a developer's point of view.

[waterfall 707]

what do they mean by blackmail... like is she paying them or something?

[holy scheisse 20,341]

But the music still (often) slaps so 

[Ronk 14,089]

I don't understand why people pay attention to reviews.  Critics often have agendas and are swayed by considerations other than the music.  What really matters is if someone personally like a song or not.  Best not to allow one's own appreciation of a song to be swayed by the opinions of reviewers.  Besides the considerations mentioned in this thread, some critics are haters and try to poison the opinions of the public about an artist they dislike.   I think the biggest problem is that the public can be swayed by what they read.  The music speaks for itself and I hope people just listen and form their own opinions.

[chun li 2,220]

Corruption? In journalism??? Ru...never