Uninformed Reviews

I have been reading a lot of reviews lately and I'v noticed a fair amount of factual errors. These errors tend to make me dismiss the entire review as irrelevant. I'm not talking about *subjective* statements like "this is the best band ever!", but statements like "this song was clearly influenced by (say) Wondrous Stories by Yes", and the song being reviewed was recorded in 1973! The statement is patently untrue! (For those who don't know, Wondrous Stories dates from 1976-1977). My question to you is this: Do you tend to overlook these inconsistencies, or does it ruin the whole review for you?

Edited by Walker - July 30 2007 at 19:36

stonebeard wrote: I haven't read many reviews lately, but unless it's a big goof, I don't care. I called a band once post-rock or something when they were not post rock at all.

I tend to overlook them. In the example you mentioned the person could very well have good opinions and be knowledgable about the album he's reviewing while not knowing when "Wondrous Stories" was recorded.

Equality 7-2521 wrote: I tend to overlook them. In the example you mentioned the person could very well have good opinions and be knowledgable about the album he's reviewing while not knowing when "Wondrous Stories" was recorded.

I think the correct solution is.....

Proofread/Double-check grammer, spelling and accuracy.

TheProgtologist wrote: I am not crazy about your topic title.   Where I come from to call someone ignorant is pretty rude.

It's difficult to put it in one word. "Inaccurate" is close ... but I guess what you're really meaning is reviewers who write factual statements without double-checking them. Well, I think you can't know everything, and sometimes you just deduce something and get used to it - if it fits - although it's factually wrong. In the case of these Yes songs ... well, obviously the reviewer thought that they sound much alike. IMO it doesn't matter that much which one was released first, but of course a minor mistake like that shows that he's probably not *the* expert on Yes.

I guess we are all completely flawless and never make any such stupid mistakes except for those poor losers . So down with them!  



Edited by BaldFriede - July 30 2007 at 09:09

oooh...sorry...I mentioned the agro smiley, but I think I confused that with the "Regressive archives" thread.  Oops!!

Ignorant is not an insult, it is a statement of fact. If you don't know something, you are by definition ignorant of it. I think you all are being to hard on Walker. He is not saying that he never makes mistakes, he is simply stating that reading misinformation in reviews is a turn off, and I agree.

If you were reading a book or a magazine filled with factual errors, wouldn't that make you question the value of the book?