Critics vs bloggers: Battle one another or work together and make a living?
I am fascinated and slightly bemused by the ongoing battle raging around theatre criticism – i.e. the one in which serious print critics are “dying” in favour of bloggers and the Twittersphere – which had swords being drawn yet again this week by recently-removed Sunday Telegraph critic Tim Walker’s howl of despair in the Guardian.
Telling off Tim Walker
Myriads pundits, paid and otherwise – including the lovely Official Theatre editor and #LDNTheatreBloggers organiser Rebecca Felgate, freelance journalist (and one of my own former contributors) Catherine Love, arts graduate blogger Megan Kinsey and The Stage’s Mark Shenton, who has tackled the topic frequently – have already written well-informed and, in Rebecca’s case, highly impassioned responses to Tim’s diatribe against “spotty” online reviewers. (Rebecca also pointed out what struck me as the biggest irony: that Tim’s argument about the demise of print journalism was published in the Guardian’s online blog.)
Former Sunday Telegraph theatre critic Tim Walker
I have no desire to rehash what others have already said so eloquently and, in any case, I don’t want to respond point by point to what Tim has said (some of which is valid) – the truth is, I’ve always felt curiously detached from such critical concerns.
That disinterest probably sounds odd coming from someone who founded and ran WhatsOnStage.com, the UK’s leading theatre website, for over 16 years and, arguably, played a key part in establishing online theatre criticism in this country. (I was interviewed on this very subject for a new book by Andrew Haydon, who has also offered his own riposte to Tim Walker this week.)
I would talk myself blue in the face explaining what was so crippling about the 24-hour difference in attending the second night of a major opening.
Battle or no big deal?
Did it annoy me when PRs wouldn’t give WhatsOnStage review tickets in the early years? Or, in my mind, nearly as bad: no tickets for first nights alongside the ‘proper’ critics? You bet it did. I would talk myself blue in the face explaining what was so crippling about the 24-hour difference in attending the second night of a major opening for a website meant to be the first stop for all things theatrical.
But, as a former (high-tech) publicist myself, I also empathise with the pressures of the usually thankless PR job – and regardless, I won that battle for WhatsOnStage many years ago. That fact was confirmed by a leading West End publicist who told me, after I was dismissed by the new American owners of the website last December: “WhatsOnStage is the only theatre website with any real credibility; the others we only tend to deal with as seat-fillers when we need them.”
Well, big deal. I no longer have to be first with everything, have no doubt about my own credibility and, personally, don’t give a hoot whether I see a show on its first night, last night or any night (or matinee) in between. I’m just delighted to be invited and to share my opinions on the shows I like with other people who care about theatre.
As I’ve already blogged about here, I haven’t considered myself a theatre “critic” for years – though, I still retain my Critics’ Circle membership (well, it’s good fun), hugely admire those who do wear that hat and enjoy reading their (usually) well-crafted output. But I’d rather be a theatre “champion” than a critic.
Freelance journalism sucks anyway
When I left WhatsOnStage, once I was able to work again after a six-month moratorium, it never occurred to me to seek freelance journalism work, as a theatre critic, champion or any other life form. I did that – very successfully, I might add, albeit not covering the arts, with regular credits in the Evening Standard, The Times and the Express, amongst others – over 17 years ago.
I always loathed the outrageous number of hours spent pitching and chasing feature ideas to editors; nine times out of ten having those ideas either rejected or poached… If I think a subject is interesting, I want to write about it, when and how I want to write about it.
That income boat has long since sailed, and I’ve had no interest in boarding it for years anyway. I always loathed the outrageous number of hours spent pitching and chasing feature ideas to editors; nine times out of ten having those ideas either rejected or poached. If I think a subject is interesting, I want to write about it, when and how I want to write about it.
That’s the joy of blogging on my own personal website, which I’ve had tremendous fun designing and developing over the past nine months. (Having sufficient time to write all that I’d like to write about is another matter. I do desperately miss writing breaking news and more interviews, as I used to fill my WhatsOnStage days with, but my schedule and commitments now simply don’t allow it – so I’ve become an inveterate tweeter instead.)
Rethink and retool
Do I make a living out of TerriPaddock.com? No, not in and of itself. But it is an absolutely key part of my personal branding and marketing, and a great shop window, and testing ground, for some of my other services. Over the past six months, I’ve been hired to provide content and communications product and strategy for a number of clients, including a few outside the theatre industry, as well as to host several Q&As and other events.
At the same time, all of these fresh experiences and skills that I’m gaining are fuelling my plans for other new business initiatives. The next WhatsOnStage, I hear you ask? (I’ve lost track of the number of times this question has been lobbed at me over that this year.) Answer: absolutely not – been there, done that. But these are projects that I am as excited and passionate about as I was about WhatsOnStage when David Dobson and I were first starting out with that little baby of ours all those years ago. And that’s very good sign, I’d say.
So, for Tim Walker and any other journalists who’ve recently lost their staff jobs or other regular gigs, I feel for you but I also want to warmly encourage you to:
- take heart,
- embrace the potential of online, start your own website, get blogging,
- establish a personal brand, become your own boss,
- update your skills, refresh your thinking,
- open yourself up to new ideas and they’ll start flooding in.
Journalism, as we once knew it, may no longer pay the bills. Yes, that’s sad and unfortunate in many ways, but it is what it is. Fortunately, in this 21st century digital age, quality content, and your skills in creating it, are more in demand than ever. You absolutely can and should adapt.
Also, please, once you’ve got up and running, drop me a line. Maybe there’s something we can collaborate on in our new portfolio careers.
I was interested to read your blog in response to Tim Walker’s rant. It seems that I was one of the few people who agreed with what he said, but maybe we have been interpreting his views in different ways.
First, I would like to say that I am no Tim Walker fan – I very often disagree with his views. However, disagreeing with critics is hardly the point. To call bloggers ‘spotty’ is just
silly, but I thought he was bemoaning the disappearance of newspaper reviews more than regretting the disappearance of job opportunities.
I was sad to see you leave WhatsOnStage and I check out that website far less frequently these days, in just the same way that I regret the disappearance of the ‘old’ printed Time Out (now just a tourist mag) and get no satisfaction from its over-complex website. I want to read informed opinions on theatre productions, not blogs which chit-chat about everything; I don’t want to use the Internet for making friends and influencing people; and I’m not looking for a job.
I find Libby Purves’s blog reliable for regular reviews of current theatre. I followed her on-line when she left the Times and occasionally I am redirected from one website to another and discover others keen to give their opinions. But they only go to see what they expect to like and then tell me (sometimes in depth, sometimes not) whether they liked it or not. These are not the kind of reviews I want to read. They are not the same as the best newspaper critics who at least try to be objective about a great variety of theatre shows. Regular readers of the half-dozen or so good newspaper critics get to know who they can
trust and where bias lies. On-line, there are dozens of eager posters (posers?) all clamouring for attention but thereby dissipating their effectiveness, all eager to discuss matters like a debating society. There is a need for this, but it is not a replacement for the informed criticism I expect from newspapers.
I have loved the theatre all my life and satisfy my theatrical hunger by taking our Theatre Group to a theatre every week. My partner and I do it as a not-for-profit hobby, which paysfor our own theatre tickets. Of course we choose what we want to see, but for us it’s important to gather a variety of critical opinions as soon as a show opens, so we can decide what will appeal and what tickets will sell. The newspaper critics, both in print or on-line, provide that service in the most easily accessible way.
Perhaps I have to move with the times and change my outlook for the digital age. In the meantime I shall go on appreciating the best of the newspapers’ theatre “champions” (yes, I love your re-definition of a reviewer’s job) and when I discover worthy on-line replacements I hope I shall appreciate them too.
I would like to challenge your opinion that bloggers “only go to see what they expect to like”. Of the bloggers I follow avidly this is simply not true – they attend a very wide range of theatre and are in fact seeing more diverse productions than the critics. As well as all the obvious shows, you’ll get bloggers going into the depths of fringe theatre and this is a really good thing.
As both an arts PR (and proud member of the CIPR!) and a theatre critic, I sit on both sides of the fence and good to see you mention that a PRs job is often a thankless task. I do though find the quote from the ‘leading West End publicist’ about ‘seat fillers’ slightly worrying but also a sad reflection of the somewhat dated views of some of the, London based mainly it has to be said, PR agencies.
As your piece so rightly points out the media landscape, rightly or wrongly, has changed forever. Just as those former journalists who have been displaced need to look at new avenues so some PR agencies need to move away from their ‘print only’ approach.
Totally by coincidence I penned a blog for The Public Reviews this week, prompted by a four word response from a leading West End PR agent who stated ‘we don’t do online’.
http://www.thepublicreviews.com/editors-blog-we-dont-do-online/
Like you in the early days of What’s On Stage we will continue the slow battle of explaining changing news consumption, hit rates and readership figures but venues and PR agents need to play a bit of catch up as well.
Interestingly its an area where regional theatre seems to be way ahead of their London counterparts. Regionally online has been generally embraced for a number of years as a key part of the PR mix but while some of London’s PR professionals understand the need to explore this new landscape others, such as the one who inspired the blog above, are missing out on a real opportunity to highlight their clients product.