I am not talking about someone whose point of view differs from mine here. I am quite used to reading reviews of a show I was disgusted by while the reviewer thought it was a shining example of television, or vice versa. While that can be irritating, it can also be really interesting, because sometimes seeing a thing from another person's point of view can give you a broader idea of the whole picture, whether you agree with their end result or not.
What I am talking about is reviewers who clearly weren't paying attention to what they were watching in the first place. That's a cardinal sin my friends. I have two simple rules for reviewing media in a public forum (and I don't mean someone's personal blog here, I am talking news sites and the like), and they are these:
- If you are watching/reading/listening to something with an intent to review, you need to pay attention to it. You should probably even give it more than one go-through. If your job is to review something, then you are not only there for entertainment. You have an obligation to (at least attempt to) understand what is going on to the fullest, that means attention to detail. If you miss a crucial line from inattention and then go off bashing or raving about something out of context, someone who is reading your review to gauge if something is worthwhile will be misled and those who saw/read/heard your item of review are going to be confused and likely irritated (perhaps enough to doubt your competence).
- You need to be capable of objectivity. Whether or not you like the work as a whole is irrelevant. As a reviewer, your job is to help a person decide whether or not this is a piece of media that they personally would enjoy (or, if they've seen it, to help them get an objective view of the media so that they can gain a better understanding of what was actually going on throughout). You can't let your view be tainted by your personal taste. You need to be able to step outside of yourself and say, "well, despite how I felt about this episode, this particular element actually really worked, or this particular element really didn't work at all." Reading a review where it is clear that the writer just didn't care for it at all and didn't even try for objectivity (or a review where the writer clearly loved it so much they feel the need to gloss over anything that might have been a flaw) you're just going to hit a huge strike with your readers 90% of the time.
Maybe I am being harsh here, but I expect reviews on a site where I go to get news to be professional. Just as I expect that site to post a disclaimer for potential spoilers or items that should still be considered rumors. Obviously, there are exceptions. For example, if you write for something like The Onion, well, you're going to have a different set of rules, aren't you? The same goes if you're writing for a clearly defined "gossip site." The difference with these types of site is that you have a certain expectation coming from them and that expectation has a lot less responsibility attached than if you are going to a site for reliable news on what's going on. Just as reviews in a newspaper should be professional, so should be reviews on a news site. If a reader wants one person's specific thoughts and opinions, rather than an actual review, they would go to a blog. If a reader wants to discuss with others online about the merits or lack thereof, they would go to a community message board or chat room.
Sigh, I guess I'd better give you an example about what I mean, hmm? Note, some spoilers ahead for the most recent episode of Dollhouse. Okay, proceed.
A large chunk of this week's Dollhouse episode was focused on giving us the back story of the doll known as Echo, whose real name is actually Caroline. We learn exactly what it was she did to end up in her current circumstances. At one point a conversation is shown where the local Dollhouse head honcho Adelle is offering her an "out" of sorts by becoming a doll. Adelle mentions she's been doing this particular "dance" for two years now. It is clear that Adelle is referring to herself and her position as the headhunter for the dollhouse--she has been doing that for two years. In the review I read of this episode that just got my goat, the reviewer completely misheard or misinterpreted this remark (this is why I really advocate watching more than once if you are reviewing a tv show or movie--I refuse to believe someone is writing reviews for a professional publication and doesn't have a VCR or DVR). The reviewer stated that Adelle had said that she and Caroline had been doing this "dance" for two years and proceeded to speculate on what Caroline had been doing for two years and how had she stayed ahead of the Rossum corporation, yada yada yada. Then the reviewer berated the show's writers and runners for not giving more detail about this and just leaving it hanging in the wind. The reviewer just made up their own unsolved mystery because of lack of attention and then got annoyed about said unsolved mystery, allowing it to color the review of the episode. Totally unprofessional. Also, very confusing and distracting for the reader.
Sigh, look, I know people make mistakes. We are all only human after all. But here's the thing. I am someone who very strongly feels that if you have a job or a duty, to give it less than your best effort is just unforgivable. Whether it is the job you are paid to do or volunteer work, there are people out there expecting your best from you. To not give it to them is just not cool. Clearly, just looking at the job I spent 7 1/2 years being miserable in, not everyone feels this way at all--but that doesn't stop me from being offended by the lack of trying by people. It's a really sad state on the human condition, if you ask me. Apathy is the disease that is going to kill our culture, I swear it. Um, I seem to have gotten off track. Although, given that this is a blog, with a readership of maybe four, that is allowed in this kind of forum. If I had been writing a professional review on something, well, I would be actively using the delete key now, wouldn't I?
What it boils down to is this: Someone can be an excellent writer and be completely unsuited to writing reviews. I don't know how much I fit into the former category, but I know for a fact I am squarely outside of the range of people who fit into the latter. I watch what I like, most of the time, and I tend to really like what I like. While I could definitely get the "pay attention" part down if I was going to write professional reviews, I already know I probably would not be so good with the "objectivity" part of things. This is why I continue to refrain from submitting entries to some of my favorite sites when they are looking for new writers, and also why I think I get so upset when the people they choose to write reviews so clearly should be writing something else. If you give out the assignments for any type of publication that has professional reviews, it is your responsibility to make sure that the people you give those assignments to are capable of doing them professionally.
I'm not naming names but there's a site I love that has at least two reviewers who should be doing almost anything else. And damn, if it isn't irritating.
Okay, end rant.
Um...happy thoughts, happy thoughts...
Ooh, saw Monsters v. Aliens on Friday and absolutely loved it! It's a nice family friendly movie that seemed to appeal to all of the kiddos in the audience while definitely still having enough substance to entertain us grown ups. It was just plain fun. So, if you're looking for something up that alley, I totally recommend it.
In other news, found out this week that I am having a girl come August. Huzzah! So that's super exciting.
And on that note, fair folks, I bid you adieu.
No comments:
Post a Comment