The Problem with An Under Cover Weekend

Categories: Fiesta!

6098589541_33c628dc42_m.jpeg
psyberartist
Just let the pup run free!
The Riverfront Times has a long, long, long history of promoting the An Under Cover Weekend shows. On the surface it's a cool event that seems to support our huge pool of local talent. It's nice to see local bands in any showcase together, especially one where everyone is working together to try to make something bigger happen. Still, I have some issues with AUCW.

First, though, I still have my compliments for the event. The first few years of AUCW brought us some amazing sets that set the standard for future performances: Robb Steele as the Beastie Boys (perfect), Ghost in Light as the Cure (fantastic), the Bureau as Duran Duran (dreamy), the Blind Eyes as Elvis Costello (inspired) and 7 Shot Screamers as No Doubt (legendary).

And I will cry forever because I missed Union Tree Review as Marvin Gaye. In fact, in the six years that AUCW has been a thing, the majority of the bands have produced great sets, and it is a testament to all of the people involved that only a few fell flat. For example, the same night that False Moves totally pulled off Interpol, Troubadour Dali should have probably covered Black Rebel Motorcycle Club instead of Sonic Youth. And the Orbz as the Stooges is pretty much unmentionable, so I won't mention it.

But it's fun to see bands that you love (or your friends who play in bands that you tolerate) go all out in tribute to those they are emulating with costumes, attitudes and mimicked stage behaviors. Still, other people in town are putting on (arguably) better cover show events with much less fanfare and far fewer demands of the bands. All of these kinds of shows should just be good Halloween-style fun and not such a serious occasion. Everything doesn't have to be such a B.F.D. all of the time.

The AUCW shows are being promoted online ad nauseum. It's smart business to advertise your show in any way possible, but the AUCW crew has gone into over-saturation mode, and it's enough to make me want to skip the show in protest. The mystique of the event is damaged by multiple updates containing links to self-congratulatory videos explaining both the process and the characters. And the videos look good, but I'm not sure what they add to the experience. We just want to go to the show and have a good time.



Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
47 comments
Brian
Brian

mmmmm..... that's good kerfluffle!

Anonymous
Anonymous

Dear Ms. Lees,

 

How dare you express a mild opinion.  Your job is only, solely to tell us when shows are and then tell us those shows were good.  Also, to review local releases and tell us they were good.  Because all local bands are good.  And all local events are... good.  All the bands that play, always, are good.  And we just want to know when and where they play, and to be reminded by you that the show and the venue were... good.  

 

It seemed kind of like maybe one of your points was something like sort of saying maybe there was something NOT  good about this event?  WTF?  That doesn't even make sense!  Did you forget what your job is?  Jeez.

 

Also, on a stylistic point, I CANNOT BELIEVE you would say you weren't going to mention something, then ACTUALLY MENTION it.   What an idiotic mistake.  I can't believe you didn't notice that when you made, like, your second draft.  Cuz like I was reading it and you said it was unmentionable, but then I was like, wait, but she DID mention it.  I trusted you!  How could you?!?!?

 

Needless to say, I have gathered every paper copy of the RFT from every box I could find, set them in a heap, and lit them on fire, as I shall do every Thursday from now on until the day I die. 

 

Fuck you for ruining my life, and likely the lives of my children and grandchildren,

 

Official St. Louis Music Scene member #3105

 

 

 

 

KristinDennis
KristinDennis

As a member of the music scene in town, I see where some of you are coming from. For sure. But, I do have to say in defense of Jaimie...

 

Everyone who is mortified, crushed or otherwise injured by ONE negative BLOG POST about ONE show needs to realize and come to terms with the fact that if you're in the music scene or any artistic scene, you're going to get some bad press. People are going to say things like "nice camel toe at 3:20" in your video comments or "I do not like this band at all" after the interview you thought you nailed (true stories). In this case, rather than blowing off steam by turning on a local publication that supports music and takes the time to think critically about what's going on, it might just behoove you to shrug it off. Right? It's going to happen again, so be gracious or laugh it off or whatever you have to do to still feel ok about yourself at the end of the day.

 

A publication that only hands out pats on the back doesn't support any of us, but instead runs the danger of creating a culture of mediocrity.  When people say bad things about me as a performer or my band, it doesn't feel great. Of course. But I'm not going to be offended by someone turning a critical eye on what I'm doing. I think St. Louis musicians get a little bit spoiled by the overwhelming positive support most of the associated parties provide, and that's awesome. But don't take positive feedback for granted. An opinion piece writer is entitled to her opinion and we're entitled to ours, but let's take a deep breath, get our hair back on and move forward.

 

And, as an aside, I had a great time last night at AUCW. But the fun of the event was never up for debate.

 

EvanSult
EvanSult

OK—missed this whole thing yesterday. Seems like an actual vital conversation about actually significant elements of AUCW, so I've got some thoughts as well. 

 

FIrst off: I'm glad the RFT ran this blog post. Lots of good is coming from it. And even though I disagree with a large portion of Jaime's points, they actually are healthy questions. Also, I agree with some of her points.

 

That said: 

 

1. Blackout dates. I gotta say, given the amount of work that goes into preparing 5 1/2 hour sets that will probably never get played again, I would hope bands would black out their schedule 4 weeks on either side. A band has to build demand to see an event, and that's one key way to do so. I think Jaime's completely mistaken in seeing that requirement as a restriction—I think of it as encouraging the bands to take the night seriously. In my opinion, bands trying to build a reliable draw in town should already be thinking in terms of limiting their shows to make each one a special event. And AUCW is WAY too much work to dilute with asking your friends to come out to your show the week before, or the week after, that show you've spent 2 solid months preparing for. The blackout dates are also part of the "quality control standards" mentioned in the article…and one of the reasons the show sold out last night.

 

2. Overpromotion. Yeah, sure, they talk about it a lot. If you don't like it, don't click on it. If it feels like it's in your face, well, yeah, it's important to everyone involved. If they're feeling sentimental about what they're doing, just remember the last time you tried to pull off something you really thought might be impossible… You wanted people to see what you did, right? 

 

3. Other cover show events. Yep, there sure are other cover show events. And pretty much all of them are awesome, because they're sincere, they're often for a good cause, and they're done well. That doesn't subtract one iota from the unique event that is AUCW.

 

4. The advice to do it yourself somewhere else instead. Yeah, any band can do a half-hour set of music by a band they love, anytime they want. But AUCW gives a valuable context. It's like a dare, a yearly challenge to musicians. And it gives the audience a framework for watching as well. Cover bands are a different thing than original bands covering their heroes for one night—but for some reason that's not always clear to some people. AUCW is a way of making it clear that Animal Empty's not trying to start a PJ Harvey cover band (etc). I have to say to Jaime that she's welcome to play a set of covers at any club in town, any night she can book it. Then perhaps the difference will be illustrated for her.

 

5. In this particular case, I don't see how this post is "in defense of the bands." That soapbox is probably reserved for band members. 

 

6. Back-handed shit-talking in the post. That "unmentionable" line should have been (and I believe would have been) edited out of an RFT article. This is a blog. That line pisses me off, on behalf of the band mentioned but more specifically on behalf of myself LOVING that set. It's a blog post though. Jaime can write whatever opinion she wants, and use an unfair rhetorical technique to do so. See also "bands that you tolerate" and "vanity project."

 

7. Respondents shit-talking the RFT. I don't know, man. I think this city would be hurting without the RFT's careful, thoughtful coverage of the whole scene, and specifically of AUCW. Were door sales increased because of the RFT's coverage? My guess is a healthy yes. Would your life in STL be better with less-informed coverage and an editor and writing staff that were disconnected from the scene? No way. If the RFT runs a blog post you don't like, don't go ballistic on them—take a step back, remember how much good info you get all the time from the RFT, breathe, and write a response disagreeing with the post, not flaming the whole paper. Come ON. This city needs the coverage it gets, and they do it really well. One pisser of a piece every once in a while is a sign that the staff cares, and that they're invested in the scene, and that they have opinions too. 

 

8. So far, so awesome. It's OK the piece got written, all the bands still rocked last night, they're gonna rock tonight, and AUCW is one of the most interesting and unique events that exist in St. Louis. The RFT knows it and shows it. If Jaime doesn't like the "bullshit rules," she doesn't have to play the show, or go to the show. I sure look forward to it every year. And I'm looking forward to tonight! 

 

Evan Sult

 

BrittStory
BrittStory

@rftmusic you can tell Jaime to 'get bent' or just plain go f yourself as well as you for running such trash! @AUCW best show of the year!

joeswiggy77
joeswiggy77

In response to your article:

 

I'm not sure if you understand it Jamie...It's OK. I'll explain. You see, It's mutually beneficial for the bands chosen to play AUCW because it brings great promotion for the venue and the bands. The bands are all paid pretty well for the night (coming from someone who has done AUCW twice). Although you may find the promotion nauseating it is necessary to bring a large crowd. It helps musicians in every group grow and try/learn new techniques/styles. Also, it's a way to connect and network with several bands that you may not of known or have played show with before.  

 

If people show up it's a Win-Win for the venue and the bands. It also justifies the 4 week blackout on the front and back end to the bands. I'm not sure what type of band or group you've played in but live shows require promotion from BOTH the venue and bands to be successful. If people don't show it really hurts everybody. This hurts the indie/rock/folk scene which is a large favorite of RFT and the majority of which AUCW groups consist. This takes away an opportunity to showcase great local bands.

 

It gives them a night, that may be more work in the short term but builds notoriety in the long run. AUCW is a pillar in a long chain of events, (not every band can be Sleepy Kitty or The Pernikoff Brothers and be an opener for Loufest). There are not very many heavily publicized events like AUCW in STL.

 

I have DIY organized shows/events through other venues that are tribute nights and they still pale in comparison to what AUCW can achieve. Tomko has made it his full time job to promote just ONE event a year. Which is kind of insane.

 

Your article is counterproductive to the Saint Louis music scene. If you want every band to be a cover band than by all means release articles the day of undercutting local events. 

 

I'm not sure if your motive was to just generate controversy or you group wasn't selected but seriously if you love this town shut up, do your job, and just plug the fucking show.

 

P.S.

thanks for not mentioning us again RFT.

 

videocrime
videocrime

"And the Orbz as the Stooges is pretty much unmentionable, so I won't mention it." THEN why bring it up? To make a point, right? well, tell me what you hated about it. lay it out. paint me a picture and then i'll tell you why you're wrong. 

A.J.S.
A.J.S.

 I understand that any event like this should be reviewed (and criticized) by our local journalists, but the idea that such a unqiue event, with such a storied history (as the author acknowledges) "hurts the very community it is designed to support" is a little much.  I'd be more accepting of this "criticism" if it wasn't premised on the ridiculous theory that "half" of these bands don't know that they are "capable of doing it themselves".  Half of these bands don't understand that they could perhaps organize a tribute show?  They were forced to accept these terms, and they just don't know any better? Thank god the author is here to help these poor, manipulated simpletons. 

 

CaptainRaoul.com
CaptainRaoul.com

While I struggle with positives and negatives of a venue with a no camera policy, it is entirely appropriate for an event like this.  I think it’s great that the organizers take the event serious enough to arrange professional photography and video.  The presence of professional A/V types mean no one needs to bother with their iPhone or Flip camera.  I would much rather see a high quality version of tonite’s events, and I prefer when event organizers take charge like this.  I think the dedicated organization that goes on at a local level for AUCW is something to applaud.

 

And complaining about too much online promotion for something is missing the point of the internet entirely.  These guys do a good job of making noise about this event.  If it’s too loud for you, maybe take a step back. Or two.

Moynonet
Moynonet

Can we get this article in animated gif form?

jaylewisstl
jaylewisstl

Honest feedback is healthy, and I like seeing these kinds of things discussed openly.  I have no doubt that the AUCW organizers, the RFT, and local bands (AUCW participants or not) have a shared interest in seeing St. Louis's music scene do well.  People have strong opinions about music, and that's a good thing.

 

As someone who's in a band playing the show tomorrow, I'll just throw in my $.02 - 

 

The blackout policy seems to be a key sore spot in this write-up.  I don't think it's as restrictive on bands' productivity as you're making it sound.  Creating original music primarily happens at practice and in the studio, not at local gigs.  I've talked to quite a few musicians who've played this event, and the gig blackout hasn't come up as a point of contention.  My band played at a different venue of comparable size a couple of years ago that actually had a similar policy.  We thought it was overkill, but we reacted with a similar shrug of the shoulders and took the gig anyway.  It just meant a few weeks of extra practice time and less hauling of amplifiers.

 

I can only speak for my band's situation, but we've been working on a record of originals for a November release, and we had two productive recording sessions during the weeks that we were practicing Neil Young tunes.  If we hadn't agreed to an AUCW set, we wouldn't have played gigs anyway on account of the recording schedule.  Sure, we could do a cover set anytime and probably should just for a change of pace and to stretch our musical chops, but AUCW is a well-organized event that gave us a structure and a date where we could perform for a bigger audience than we'd draw for a local show that's just us.  No band is an island, and it's always a pleasure to participate in efforts like AUCW, STL Loud, and RFT Showcases that build community and help the fans of various local acts discover other local acts.

 

We thought AUCW would be a fun way to reach some new people ahead of an album release, and it gave us a nice breather from our regular material.  Could the blackout policy be relaxed?  Sure - but if bands are interested in writing music, then playing gigs 3 nights a week probably isn't the best strategy.  Maybe if local rock gigs actually paid well, then we'd care more about "losing the work," but the not-so-dirty-secret about local rock shows is that they really don't pay that well - I make considerably more money playing cello for weddings (call me if you're getting married).  We play rock music because it's fun.

 

I'm looking forward to the shows this weekend.  We had a blast working up Neil Young tunes, and I can't wait to see what the other bands put together.

abo541
abo541

Everyone has a right to an opinion but, why can't we write about something positive? No one here is making millions off their shit so stop blasting everyone.

kissmass
kissmass

ha.  im just upset there was absolutely NO mention of GOD in any of the aucw discussion.  right chairy?

 

does anyone remember laughter?

 

thanks for the neg press to help draw more attention to the event jamie!!!!

Jarredgastreich
Jarredgastreich

Can I take back what I said about this being a great piece? After talking with a head honcho on the phone about my rash grief, I can't help but imagine that this article would have never came into existence if RFT only picked up the phone for insider input. Very opinionated, and a lot of very happy RFT advertisers. 

heath.parker
heath.parker

The biggest crime of AUCW is that most of the acts pick such uninteresting bands to cover.

zeek
zeek

That kind of restrictive policy is exactly why the event can't get bands to sign on and why it is failing at drawing any acts for the weekend.  It's obvious no one thinks it's fair by everyone's refusal to participate.

 

Wait...that's not right...

rivertonrock
rivertonrock

Also, the title of this rant is "The Problem with An Undercover Weekend." So what is THE problem?

rivertonrock
rivertonrock

Sounds like AUCW didn't accept someone's submission...

Vida
Vida

I love the "masterbaiting piece" documentry they will forever have, lol.

dadoggy
dadoggy

Why is everyone getting their panties in a bunch bc someone gives an actual honest opinion vs. a plug?  Although the first point made is to go see the show.

The media is so easy on everything in this city whether it's music, sports, whatever.

95% of the press for this event is still positive.  

It's a kickass event and if someone else doesn't feel that way, it's OK.  Take what you want from the article and leave the rest.

 

michaeltomko
michaeltomko

Jaime, I don't begrudge you at all for writing this. Actually, I'm surprised to see that it has taken you six years to do so.

 

When AUCW started back in 2007, it was right before we opened The Bluebird and it just seemed like a really fun thing to do. It was a terribly organized and surprisingly pulled-off, but regardless, those were two amazing nights. I even remember your huge smile during The Cure set.

 

I personally had no idea going into it that it was going to be an "annual" thing. But, both the bands and many of those in attendance asked us to give it another shot and from there bands kept submitting, and people kept coming, so thus we have continued to put on AUCW every year since.

 

Personally, I do not have a single tie to the local music scene anymore outside of An Under Cover Weekend. I no longer have a band. I am no longer a part of The Firebird. And, outside of organizing bands for the Rock n Roll Craft Show, I no longer book shows independently. You can consider me outside of the scene completely.

 

All of that said, I keep coming back to do AUCW every year because I love it and I find myself in the company of other people who love it too. That's it. It is not about making money. It is not about promoting my club or my show calendar. It is not about promoting my band. An Under Cover Weekend is an attempt at curating a pair of nights that celebrate local music through covers and I am incredibly proud to be a part of it.

 

You are right though. There are other shows that do covers or tributes better than we do. There are negatives to bands giving up being themselves for a few weeks/months in preparation of the show. Hell, there are a lot of reasons not to do this show. But, no one is forcing anyone to play.

 

The blackout that you mention… Yeah, that's on there so that all bands are aware of it when they submit to play. They actually have to click "yes" that they agree to the blackout on the submission form and it is in place as a sign of respect to the nine other bands on the show that have put in the same amount of work. And, in six years of doing this it has been enforced only once, when a band scheduled another event the same weekend as AUCW. I don't see how that is unfair.

 

But regardless, I'm sorry that I've offended you by my tweets and facebook posts and I know that you are not alone in that sentiment, either. I totally get it. Promoting is hard and I tend to have a lot to say. But, to be honest with you, you're welcome to unfollow me/us anywhere that we post because if you're offended by status updates about great local bands, photographers, videographers, and businesses all working on something together, than you are probably not our target demographic anyway.

 

AUCW is nothing beyond the cast of people that comprise it and therefore I will always stand behind our self-congratulatory promotion. These people do great stuff and whether right or wrong, I've taken on the burden of telling people about it.

 

Oh, and @Jarredgastreich , I'm sorry that you're offended by the photo policy tonight. When you emailed me awhile back, I was really excited about the opportunity to maybe work with you. Unfortunately, for many reasons it didn't work out, which I believe include a few misunderstandings, and for that I'm sorry. This weekend's photo/video restrictions were imposed by the venue, in accordance with their current shift in policy due to recent issues impacting the quality of shows for the attendees. This is something that I personally support and I believe that it also helps to respect our official photo/video team members as well. Again, I'm sorry if there was any confusion and like I offered to you last night, Mike and I would be more than happy to discuss this with you in person tonight at the show.

 

Disclaimer: I mostly use the word "I" throughout the above because I want this comment to reflect only my personal opinions. That said, AUCW would be nothing without Mike Cracchiolo, Bryan Sutter, Jason Stoff, Allison Babka, David Treadway, Kevin FitzGerald, and after this weekend, the 56 bands who have played An Under Cover Weekend.

Kiernan_Maletsky
Kiernan_Maletsky

I hope it's clear that this is obviously meant as one person's perspective and not some sort of attempt at an objective indictment. Our enthusiastic coverage of AUCW very much includes this year's installment (it is one of the five shows we selected as a critic's pick in print this week and is also included in both our blog-based show pick columns). 

 

And by that I absolutely do not mean to undercut what Jaime is saying. Far from it -- obviously I stand behind anything we publish in this space. Jaime is as enthusiastic a supporter of St. Louis music as you will find anywhere, and that's what makes her perspective valuable. It's a safe bet that her perception of AUCW bears more than a passing resemblance to the perceptions of other St. Louis music fans. Hopefully we can have a conversation about this show in particular or (even better) a more general one that is in some way edifying. 

reverendstrawfoot
reverendstrawfoot

While I don't necessarily agree with the majority of the article, I will say it's refreshing to see other points of view now and again, rather than the usual back scratching. It's a blog, and writers are allowed to have an opinion, even if it doesn't necessarily reflect the views of the RFT itself...at least they should.

 

I do have to take umbrage with Jamie's opinion of blackouts...Quite frankly, bands should be doing this any way. Strawfoot makes a point not to over do it, especially if there's a touring band involved. To over saturate yourself is a disservice to your own band, as well as the other bands on the bill, and the venue itself.

 

I can't help but take mild issue to the claim that none of these bands could pull a big crowd without something like AUCW, as well. Any band is capable of such a feat if their music is true, and their work ethic strong.

 

Promotion is tricky. It's a tightrope. Promote too much and you're overbearing, and people start avoiding your shows out of spite. Promote too little and nobody knows about it. I've been flamed for over promoting in the past...by competing promoters, by the RFT's (former) editorial staff...but quite frankly, I'd rather err on the side of too much rather than too little.

 

Personally, I've never been to AUCW, but I think it's a great annual music event, one that many look forward to. I'd rather see these bands play their own stuff, or at the very least cover the songs in their own style rather than trying to carbon copy established bands, but it's a great concept, nd one that everyone involved labors over, and it shows.

 

Like it or not, it's a well-received part of our local music culture, and a welcome one at that.

 

To the promoters, keep doing what you do, but remember, when you get defensive and enter into a blog argument, it depreciates the professional side of your demeanor. I learned this the hard way myself.

 

Long live local music, and the people that serve it so passionately.

Pianoman321
Pianoman321

This was a really wierd piece if it was in defense of the bands. Do you know how many groups apply to play this thing every year? A lot. You know why? Because it's awesome. And everyone wants to play an awesome show.

jstoff
jstoff

I didn't realize promotion - honest, non-deceptive promotion of the spirit of the event, and the hard work that goes into it from a small group of people - was something to be purposefully limited.It's all the product of people, myself included, that think it IS a B.F.D. because we've put in time, money, and craftsmanship, and we're proud of the result. Excuse us for sharing our excitement.

magmacrest
magmacrest

Sounds like a bit of a bash fest aimed at the promoters. Who, btw are doing more for the saint louis music scene between the two or three of them than RFT will ever do. Want to know why great touring bands are beginning to come back to STL? It's because the people putting on AUCW are bringing them here, established a great venue, and are doing all ages shows for music fans. This is their weekend to just go to a show and have a good time. And faulting them for promoting is fucking bogus. Sounds like RFT has a little chip on it's shoulder against someone.a few seconds ago

mcracchiolo
mcracchiolo

Wow, Jaime. This is a real slap in the face considering the DIY nature of AUCW. The blackout rule- which you misrepresent, I might add- is there to make sure that people come out to the show. It's not offensive, it's common sense. Not one of these bands has ever played for as big of a crowd as AUCW draws by doing it singlehandedly. It's the community effort that makes it possible. Sorry you missed the point of the whole thing.

 

I got hate mail once before over the blackout thing. It was from Beatle Bob, so congratulations, you're in good company. Had you bothered to do a little research you might have known that there is a blackout rule for EVERY show we book at the Firebird. It's on our website. If you'd care to talk shit on me for that, you've got my phone number.

 

I get that you don't like Tomko spamming the event. I get that it's hard for you to get down with anything that isn't pre-approved by the cool kids of Cherokee (formerly the cool kids of S. Grand). But if you want to write a hit piece over more than your own arbitrary anti-hipster aesthetic sensibilities, you should probably know what you're talking about.

 

And Jarred, you weren't included because it was all about money to you as far as I could tell, and because you weren't interested in working with all ten bands. The latter is completely antithetical to the spirit of the event, and the former is an insult to all the people who put in the work first and worry about the money second.

katatomiclabs
katatomiclabs

@TammyD92 @rftmusic Plenty of valid points in this article. You *can* have an opposing viewpoint and not be a hater. :)

Jarredgastreich
Jarredgastreich

Great post. Great advice to AUCW for next year. Also, they took a bold move by restricting photography to "Official photographers and a couple of press outlets."

rivertonrock
rivertonrock

 @CaptainRaoul.com I agree. If you find yourself complaining about how much ______ you see on facebook/twitter, then it's time to read a book, or take a walk.

ohstatic
ohstatic

 @heath.parker I agree. The mention on the AUCW website is that bands have to choose "popular" artists to cover, but that means picking artists who have been played to death. What's wrong with "Billie Jean"? Nothing. But watching some band that's not Michael Jackson play it is unappealing. At this point, isn't it just rewarding familiarity?

jstoff
jstoff

 @Kiernan_Maletsky I completely understand differing opinions, and encourage active and lively conversations. However, the most damning piece of info here - the allegedly overreaching blackout  - is apparently standard convention, and should have been represented as such. It's purposefully misleading to imply that there aren't blackouts for standard shows.If the blackout rules for this event are different than other Firebird events, then it's a fair point to discuss - but for the sake of journalistic integrity, do the research and present the WHOLE story. How is it different from a standard local show at The Firebird? The differences would be the story, not the fact that a blackout exists. 

TammyD92
TammyD92

@katatomiclabs: Of course! But I see no need to rain on a parade...just don't go to it. cc @rftmusic

rivertonrock
rivertonrock

 @dadoggy The author mentions many things after complaining about AUCW's solid marketing platform. "But there are worse things..." The title of the article is inaccurate, and that bothers me. That's all.

perfectenemy
perfectenemy

 @jstoff  @Kiernan_Maletsky I've worked with bands that have done shows at The Firebird, and we've never been asked/told that we couldn't play shows in the area within a two month period. Even the Firebird's booking page only says three weeks on either side of the show.

katatomiclabs
katatomiclabs

@TammyD92 @rftmusic ...the music by local bands. Shouldn't a "biggest event of the year" actually center around local music?

katatomiclabs
katatomiclabs

@TammyD92 @rftmusic That article wasn't even really a sprinkling. Here's the thing - this event, while super cool, doesn't celebrate...

mcracchiolo
mcracchiolo

 @rivertonrock  @dadoggy That's what bothers me about it. If it had been about too much promotion or even the content of the event itself, then we might actually be a valuable debate. But instead, the writer has gone after us for completely unfounded and inflammatory ethical critiques which are not only irresponsible, they also treat the bands like a bunch of idiots who don't know any better. If you don't like the event or the way we promote it, that's fine, you're entitled to your opinion and it's not going to ruin our picnic. But if you're going to go after someone's professional reputation or insult their intelligence, you'd better come far more prepared than this piece of two-faced hack job garbage. The readers aren't necessarily going to know better, which is why a journalist should.

jstoff
jstoff

 @perfectenemy    @Kiernan_Maletsky That's information that would be better served in the context of the article - it puts the supposedly harsh blackout in perspective. Of course, the problem is that the context makes a much less compelling argument.

 

The article would have been better if it stuck to the social media saturation - an opinion, to be sure, but a valid and defensible one. Hell, I see too many AUCW tweets in my timeline, and I'm involved. Granted, I follow too many of that circle to complain - it's all on me at that point. 

Now Trending

St. Louis Concert Tickets

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

Clubs

Loading...