Say Hello To Pitchfader

Dec 3rd, 2008 // 6 Comments

Advertising Age reports that Pitchfork and The Fader have joined forces, though the degree to which the former is an “exclusive club” is, as always, tediously overstated. (Pitchfork didn’t “consider itself too cool to bother reviewing” Black Kids before setting the hype cycle into overdrive in the first place, let’s not forget.) The two are getting together for “an extensive advertising and sponsorship relationship across print, online, festivals, events and unique content exchanges,” while keeping their advertising and editorial as is.



Though it’s tempting to imagine each mag’s editorial would somehow bleed into one another, I kind of doubt that’ll happen; their styles, while paralleling each other greatly, are too different to really mesh, and besides, both seem to be doing fine without the other. My question, regaring the piece, is: why is Pitchfork “hipper-than-thou” and The Fader—which places a premium on being FIRST! to an even greater degree, particularly given its ink-and-paper flagship, which is costlier than being a Web site first—is not? Could it be that the writer of the piece has heard of the former, since it’s been written about so extensively over the last few years, while The Fader hasn’t been? If so, how—what’s that word again?—ironic.

Indies Pitchfork and Fader Form Partnership [Advertising Age]

idolator

  1. RaptorAvatar

    For some reason, this reads to me as “buddying up for the recession.” Depending on how tight things get (economy, print drying up, etc.), I could see the fork enfolding Fader within a few years.

  2. Lucas Jensen

    That story conveniently fails to mention Cornerstone Promotion, who owns the Fader et al. Just saying.

  3. the rich girls are weeping

    @Lucas Jensen: Mmmmhmmm. Way to lose your VERY LAST SHRED of credibility there, Pitchfork.

  4. Lucas Jensen

    @the rich girls are weeping: I may have more on this soon. I think the situation is more complex (of course!) than I assumed. I should not have just thrown it out there like that, though it is a question worth raising.

  5. brownham

    the fader sucks.

    they have a formula you can almost predict who they’ll cover. At least Pitchfork keeps you guessing a bit.

  6. the rich girls are weeping

    @Lucas Jensen: No, I think you should have! My first thought is, “Will Cornerstone artists be given preferential treatment on Pitchfork?” — and by that I mean in any number of ways — “exclusives,” news items, featured reviews, features, etc? I’m sorry, but I don’t buy that the content will stay seperate. I don’t.

Leave A Comment