Metallica Says It's Sorry About Review Takedowns; Blames Management
from the always-management's-fault dept
Mathew Ingram alerts us to the news that the band Metallica has responded on its own website to the controversy over representatives from the band demanding reviews of the band's latest album get taken offline. The band's response is basically to blame its management company:We were informed that someone at Q Prime (our managers) had made the error of asking a few publications to take down reviews of the rough mixes from the new record that were posted on their sites. Our response was "WHY?!!! Why take down mostly positive reviews of the new material and prevent people from getting psyched about the next record. . . that makes no sense to us!" So after a few rounds of managerial ear spank and sentencing everyone at Q Prime to 20 push-ups each, we figured why not take matters into our own hands and just post the links here on our site.And, with that, they linked to the reviews. While plausible, the whole thing sounds sketchy at this point. It seems like a weak cop-out to say "oh, it was our managers' fault" when the band has had so much controversy concerning how it has interacted with the internet community. Besides, even this response rings hollow. The band only seemed concerned that the management team took down "mostly positive reviews," not the fact that it took down reviews. It's nice that they have now linked to the reviews, but the fact that this happened in the first place still seems like a problem.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: apologies, internet, metallica, reviews, takedowns
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Not impressed in the least.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lawsuits RIAA and the obvious
Now if they could only draw other sane conclusions, i don't know like..... Why sue them and force them to give up ownership of our material when clearly people get "psyched" about getting the next song, to the point they buy our other merchandise and come to see us in concert, THAT doesn't make sense either guys. Think about it. The more places it is, the more copies that exist and have the chance of being spread THE BETTER FOR YOU MORONS !!
My $0.02
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Lawsuits RIAA and the obvious
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Playing the Devil's advocate...
Full disclosure: I don't listen to Metallica, never have, so I don't much care one way or the other.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
6=half dozen
I cut them both off over Napster, and this weak sauce will not bring me back.
If Metallica public-domained their entire prior body of work alongside the new album, I'd think about buying it. Maybe.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Seems a bit suspicious on this end
Doesn't that seem blatantly biased? It's a fact that most of the reviews were "mostly positive". Why is stating that fact somehow detrimental to their argument? Are you just hopping on the "Angry at Metallica" bandwagon just to cater to the whining internet horde? Come on Mike, you're bigger than that.
You, if anyone, seem more concerned with stating something with masked and, quite frankly, petty motives.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Seems a bit suspicious on this end
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Seems a bit suspicious on this end
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Seems a bit suspicious on this end
Seriously though, if they would just write a few songs over 60 bpm they would instantly redeem themselves... i miss battery... sniff sniff
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Playing the Devil's advocate...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nope ?
Then nothing came of it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Who or what is Metallica?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Really?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Seems a bit suspicious on this end
There weren't any really negative reviews to begin with. They were stating that factually. And, if you cared to read further:
While we occasionally enjoy reading the various comments, rumors, speculation, reviews, gossip and all the good that the internet brings, rarely do we feel the desire/need to respond to the "blogosphere" . . . hey, everyone is entitled to have their thoughts and opinions, right? However, once we re-surfaced on Tuesday after a few weeks on tour in Europe, we were informed that someone at Q Prime (our managers) had made the error of asking a few publications to take down reviews of the rough mixes from the new record that were posted on their sites. Our response was "WHY?!!! Why take down mostly positive reviews of the new material and prevent people from getting psyched about the next record. . . that makes no sense to us!" So after a few rounds of managerial ear spank and sentencing everyone at Q Prime to 20 push-ups each, we figured why not take matters into our own hands and just post the links here on our site. Kerrang, Metal Hammer, The Quietus.
You see, we have maintained an "in the press" section here on Metallica.com for many years now, posting links to reviews of shows, album and DVD releases, and various other tidbits we've come across while surfing around. Some good, some not so good, but we put 'em all up . . . sort of the same way we treat our message boards on this site . . . welcoming all feedback.
So in the spirit of keeping this section current, we've put as many of the reviews of the rough mixes of the new record up here as we could find. If we missed any, let us know . . . and in the meantime, we're always adding, so peruse at your leisure.
They SAID "reviews" without the "mostly good" suffix.
They welcome negative reviews.
And here I was thinking that taking things out of context and reporting blatant bias was for Fox News...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Seems a bit suspicious on this end
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Seems a bit suspicious on this end
While their apology does seem forced at best, saying that they are not welcoming negative feedback is just a false statement when it's clear the opposite is true. Also stating that they only welcomed -some- of the reviews is also false (since the last paragraph in their press release concerns adding more reviews to the list). However genuine that may be is up for debate, but taking someone out of context just to make a point is asinine.
Taking what someone says out of context, no matter how demonized they may be (or however much you may despise them), makes any point you were trying to make invalid. That's my argument.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Seems a bit suspicious on this end
I did NOT say that they only welcomed positive reviews. I said that they seemed upset about the fact that it was *good* reviews taken down, rather than the fact that reviews were taken down.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
No offense, but "And Justice for all" is in my opinion the best Metal album ever made, when I first heard "One", it changed my life and my musical preferences forever!!
Of course, when i heard "St Anger", I tore up my 150 dollars worth of Metallica tickets and tossed them out the window. Not to mention the whole Napster fiasco before it. As mad as I am about what they've become, they are forever immortalized as Metal gods for what they did to the Metal scene, and as such they get my respect.
And I think they are actually trying to get back down from their high horse and connect with their audience again like old times, so give them the benefit of the doubt and stop whining eveytime you hear their name, ok?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Seems a bit suspicious on this end
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Really?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Good Business
[ link to this | view in thread ]