I sometimes wonder why I bother with The Guardian Music Blog. While Readers Recommend is always fun, and there is the occasional good article, they also publish an awful lot of complete drivel. And in response to this drivel, the comment section all-too-often turns into Usenet on a bad day; the fact that far too many ‘articles’ are little more than trolls doesn’t exactly help.
Alan McGee’s weekly column is one of the worst offenders. Very occasionally he’ll come up with a meaningful re-evaluation of a neglected artist from the 60s or 70s, but all too often he spoils what might have been an interesting article with provocative hyperbole - “ELO were better than The Beatles” was an infamous one. Far more often he’d go on about some mediocre landfill indie band with hype turned up to 11. His lastest is a ridiculous puff piece bigging up Oasis (yet again), which naturally gets shredded by the commentators.
Of course, he will never respond to any comments, failing to recognise the essential two-way nature of blogging. Instead, he comes up with pearls of wisdom like this twitter,
i mean you work in the fields i live in the mansion that’s the way it rolls guardian blog readers.xoxoxoo
Oh yes, that really epitomises The Guardian’s left-of-centre ethos, doesn’t it.
Four pages into the comment thread, a commenter calling himself “Kingspark” comes up with this:
On “Twitter” you invite people to apply to clean the toilets in your mansion. Is that the best you can come up with? Look through the comments. Apart from Paul Brownell’s myriad of aliases - avatthecat, heavytrash, marycigarettes, DoubleDeuceDalton - you’ve only got one fan, Elaine S. She seems like a nice lady. And at least Paul Brownell will always back you up, he’s your employee, isn’t he? He helps you write the blogs and tells you about groups you’ve never heard of and tries his best to make it seem like you’re not completely out of touch.
And I ought to mention that several of those sock puppets have made repeated often unprovoked ad-hominem attacks on myself and others, often in completely unrelated threads (which to The Guardian’s credit have always been removed by the moderators for violating the rule against personal abuse). I consider sending an employee to post under multiple aliases to make it look as if he’s got some supporters isn’t exactly professional behaviour. Using those sock puppets for personal abuse is simply beyond the pale.
Assuming “Kingspark” is correct about those usernames he mentions (and the similarity in writing styles for those aliases he mentions gives me no reason to doubt him), then I don’t think McGee has an awful lot of credibility left. If I was the Guardian Online editor, I would definitely think twice about continuing to employ this man as a contributor.
since Kingspark’s allegations all Mcgee’s supporters seem to have gone quiet.
a bit like how all the mice, toys in the shop etc. all go to sleep when Bagpuss does.
mcgee’s next blog should be “My top 5 Paul Brownell aliases”.
The comments on that particular entry are now closed - not sure if it’s had it’s 7 days, or they closed it early.
I seriously wonder whether there will be any more blogs from McGee. He’s been a laughing stock for ages, such that when he does have something worthwhile to say nobody takes him seriously. Now Kingspark has blown his sole stoat-eyed acolyte’s cover, it think it’s all over.
Maybe he’ll come back ranting at the commenters, but I would hope the Guardian Online editors would have the guts to spike anything containing personal abuse directed at specific individuals.
pssst mostly autumn are back for the cambridge rock festival!!!
cant wait!!!!
Can I just point out that I am neither an employee of Alan’s nor am I an alias for him. What I am is an older music fan that can relate to many bands that Alan writes about and I do not expect everyone to agree with what Alan writes about but I find it quite appalling that many of the blog posters will pounce with some really nasty vitriol against Alan and has nothing whatsoever to do with the blog he has written about. I enjoy a good debate about music and its only natural that a 20 year old opinion will differ from a 40+ opinion. I do not blame Alan for not jumping in because it would not matter what he wrote in response, the nasty, immature posts he’d get in reply would probably be greater than those posts that actually would debate with Alan. In my opinion Alan has not stooped to the level of some of those abusive posters on his blogs but he is only human and if he fired back on his twitter then so what, if those posters can give it, they can also take it.
I do not have the knowledge of working in the music industry for the amount of years that Alan has, though what I think is my own personal opinions and for me its interesting in reading Alan’s concept of different bands and their music. I for one, the older I get the more interested I am going back in time to re-listen to bands that I may not have been interested in when I was much younger. Some music which I loved in the 70s/80s I now hate and vice versa.
Now if you still think I am an employee or alias then feel free to email me:-)
ElaineS - You did read the bit that said “you’ve only got one fan, Elaine S. She seems like a nice lady”, didn’t you?
Anyway, you complain about the vitriol directed at Alan McGee. But surely this is no worse that the vitriol McGee regularly dishes out on Twitter to anyone that dares disagree with him. When he adopts such an aggressive, confrontational style it’s hardly surprising that people respond in kind.
And yes, I did listen to The Grants songs on their MySpace page. And I did think they were awful rubbish, and said so. And it was entertaining watching their mouthy singer make an idiot of himself.
Maybe I’m reading it wrong but when quote has me as “Alan’s only fan” and go on to mention about aliases and employees, in my opinion this blog would have a question mark over the “only fan” as being a possible alias or employee. Its quite condescending to suggest that I alone am the only person to agree with the music blogs Alan puts up, if you have read through them all, there are many who agree with what Alan has written on said musicians. As for Alan’s retaliations on Twitter……this has come much, much later than his blogs. He only joined in the last month, his blogs and the vitriol have been running for far,far longer than that. I’d say he has been more than patient in his final retaliation. In a grown up world a person will post an opinion about a subject, an adult response would be in the negative or positive field, you not agreeing with him about The Grants is your prerogitive. If a reply doesn’t have any substance as to why a person does not like them and is filled with vitriol against the blogger then that opinion is invalid. You have to admit that in most of Alan’s blogs, the posters, posts no substance at all.
For the record I am a nice person but I am not a saddo, that quote makes me feel like I am one and that insults me, I’ll say if I like a band, if I don’t agree with Alan I might respond with my reasons or I may choose not to respond. That is the adult response, not like the many immaturish responses of many Guardian posters. It has opened my eyes to what type of characters do read The Guardian though and it doesn’t leave a fine taste in my mouth.
“In my opinion Alan has not stooped to the level of some of those abusive posters on his blogs but he is only human and if he fired back on his twitter then so what, if those posters can give it, they can also take it.”
he likes to dish it out at other twitter users totally unconnected with the Guardian blogs/blog commenters eg. Simon Price- and then blocks them when they retaliate.
so, you were saying about “immateurish responses” and being able to “take it” when you “give it”?
And don’t forget his flamewar with the fake Brian Eno.