Over the last few episodes we’ve discussed how the music press can make or break a band’s career, and even have a lasting effect on band members psyches’ long after they receive critical acclaim/indifference. My Vitriol and The Sound provide two fascinating case studies in that regard: The former were a band who gained massive buzz in the dying moments of the physical format era. The turn of the 21st century saw a frankly obscene amount of cash, coverage and opportunity being flung at bands. Now of course, we’re not naive enough to think that this happens in a vacuum - having well connected friends and family can and does play a part in that sometimes. Indeed, My Vitriol went at it so hard, so early in their careers that it by all accounts led to burn out. On the other hand, The Sound were contemporaries of bands that had acclaim heaped upon them, yet seemed to miss out on it themselves. Various members of the band would speak about this at different points over the years, discussing how seeing their peers get critical and commercial success but never tasting it themselves led to a significant amount of distress. We’re probably past the age where the “Pitchfork Effect” is relevant, but from the early 00s to the mid 10s, the influence of Pitchfork’s opinions was huge. They were tastemakers. Kingmakers, even. The gatekeeper of coolness. Their opinion could, and did, definitely influence the trajectory of many now beloved bands. In part one of this special, we talk about music journalism as a whole and our experiences with it, both as part of the machine and as artists at the mercy of it. Next week we’re going to pick an album each that we think Pitchfork reviewed wrongly, and make our case for it being included in our discography. FUN.