Lou Carlozo is a staff writer with the Chicago Tribune…a true roaring lamb. He also writes for some Christian music publications. He recently wrote this perspective on the loss of editorial integrity in the music journalism, including in CCM-World:
The letter by CCM [magazine] founder John Styll in the January 2007 issue (“Comin’ On Strong”) was excellent in its analysis of how awkward it can be to properly size up a Christian music artist who is viewed as “untouchable” because of record sales, status, “souls saved” or any other measure we mistakenly put on people who, at the end of the day, are as broken and capable of mediocrity as the rest of us.
But has anything really changed since 1993? I used to be an enthusiastic contributor and music critic to this and many other Christian music magazines, including 7 Ball, Mars Hill Review, Christian Single and Acaza.com. Yet today, my strong feeling is that if anything, some aspects of the process of dishing direct, honest Christian music criticism have stagnated—and at the worst, have gone in reverse faster than a backpedaling politician.
My last experience writing for CCM was an attempt to review a Bethany Dillon record, “Imagination” (Sparrow). I sat with the CD a good, long time and did my best to embrace it on every level a critic should: the casual listen, the deep headphone listen, the lyrical listen, the spiritual content listen. It struck me, over and over again, as being a formulaic and stiff effort, a conclusion I could not escape no matter how hard I tried and prayed.
Yet when I submitted this review to CCM, it was spiked because it did not mesh with a cover story that same month heralding Dillon as the next big thing. To which I say, in hindsight: So freaking what?
At the Chicago Tribune, where I serve as music editor and a DVD columnist, point-counterpoint is a common, positive process in the critical game. It can even be fun and spark much positive conversation. My opinion is just that, an opinion. It’s not right and it could be wrong! But it deserves to be heard so long as a) it has a well-reasoned argument to support it and b) it does not unfairly or personally attack the artist or art in question.
How sad that review did not run. Further, I can only shudder to think what the consequences would be if I tried such a move on my Tribune writers; it would be a compromise of journalistic principle at best, and an ethical violation at worst. It smacks of why Rolling Stone no longer has any street cred in its reviews. Chicago Sun-Times pop critic Jim DeRogatis, in an infamous, sad day for rock journalism, was handed back a scathing Hootie and the Blowfish album review he did while working at Rolling Stone. How come? His editors wanted a higher star rating on it, regardless of what his well-reasoned thoughts were. Shame on them—and good for DeRo for having the courage to walk out on the review, and the job.
I understand the Christian music press works differently; there is a strong view that CCM and other magazines need to cheerlead artists who believe they are serving God and a higher calling. That said, it does no one good to squelch voices of dissent when they have something of value to contribute to the discussion. Iron sharpens iron, right?
My prayer is that CCM, in the future, decides to be much more bold in giving less-than-stellar reviews to the scared cows of Christian music, when such notices are warranted—and not just easy targets such as Carman. As for my Bethany Dillon review, it found not one but two homes: In the Christian Century, where I serve today as lead music critic, and the Chicago Tribune.
I’ve found consistently objective reviews at Christianity Today’s Music section, plus I’ve enjoyed their editor’s discussions of the nasty responses from readers.
Loading ...
January 14, 2007 at 01:17
I love reading Jeffrey Overstreet’s CT movie reviews and his blog http://www.lookingcloser.blogspot.com/ You’d like him too Mikey in case you don’t know him, yet.
January 14, 2007 at 01:21
I’ve scaled back on listening to CCM simply because there are a lot of artists that are being encouraged to put out mediocre work. They’re shooting for the middle, because CCM’ers aren’t demanding more. Hey, if it’s on K-Love, it’s gotta be good, right? Besides, we’re not supposed to say anything bad about other Christians.
January 14, 2007 at 19:26
Several years ago it became apparant that CCM (and most other Christian music sources) were working hand in hand with record companies to promote albums. Isn’t that the playbook. Help us promote our artists and we’ll pay the bucks for the ads. Christian sub-culture continues to be unalert and usually unimpressive. If we’re simply promoting artists to the already convinced, what ministry category does that fall under? Marketing or sales? dt http://www.davetilma.com
January 15, 2007 at 11:30
Music reviews can be very difficult. That’s why there aren’t any on my website, CCM Links. I’ve recieved a number of CDs for review, and just haven’t gotten around to writing them…primarily because 1) I’m not a music expert, despite my best efforts, and 2) I really don’t want to discourage budding artists.
In reality, I’ve found two extremes in the reviews of others: one is a standard that’s low-to-non-existent, and the other is ridiculously high and closed-minded. Many criticize Christian music unfairly, holding it to a higher standard than any other form of music…based, I suppose, on the idea that it has eternal value rather than temporal. Neither approach is worth much, in my mind.
There have been a lot of comedies about the chef hoping for a good review from the food critic. I suppose that some artists feel the same about music critics…but I can’t help but ask myself “what’s going to make someone listen to an artist’s music?”. The answer is simple: getting a taste.
If every artist offered the ability to listen to (and download, preferably) a few of their songs, I’m convinced that the age-old process of music reviews would soon disappear. People could decide for themselves and be critics in their own right.
What do you think?
January 15, 2007 at 17:33
The whole anti-CCM thing is a bit tiring. It’s just the way it is. Once the big secular multi-nationals started buying up CCM labels, we all knew where “the Christian music industry” was headed. In the beginning (70’s), it really was about the music and the ministry, but slowly it became more about livelihoods, long term careers, sustainability, and executive and corporate fortunes. It’s not that Christian musicians didn’t have great music to offer, but just that the music became the means to maintain the industry machine, and the industry lost its “first love.” Now, it’s all about labels, distribution, and radio formats. That is what defines CCM now because that is what generates the most sales to keep the industry fed.
I don’t mean to offend anyone when I say this, but Christian music reviews probably have almost no impact on actual industry sales. Reviews are interesting, but they seem to me to be more subtext for a very insular world of people who wouldn’t buy the recordings that get the bad reviews anyway. The industry machine (labels, distribution, radio) is what sells records, not the reviewers. Reviewers have their own kind of “industry” and a need to think they are, perhaps, more important than they really are when it comes to this kind of industry stuff. Where they really are important, though, is reviewing non-CCM, or little-known CCM, or indie artists. They can give visibility to those who do not yet have it, although once achieved those artists usually become assimilated by the industry Borg, so it kind of makes the reviewer a co-dependent enabler. But, I digress.
It may take another decade, but it seems reasonable that the rise of the “Indie” industry (an accurate oxymoron), and the maturation of the internet and digital delivery, will eventually wear down the industry version of Christian music. There are countless ways now to “hear before you buy.” As important as reviewers want to think they are, they are “words in the wind” in comparison to a personal review by a potential buyer. Like it? Buy it. Don’t like it? Don’t buy it. And that’s where things are headed. Not only that, but bloggers will become, and probably already are, much more influential on vertical music markets and consumers than general market kinds of reviewers in industry magazines and periodicals. Again, the general market guys are interesting, but probably not all that effective in terms of impact. Bloggers are an extension of the “personal reviewer” model of consumer-centered experience, and probably are very effective in driving sales for specific artists.
And a postscript about Bethany Dillon. I too had a “Huh?” moment when CCM Mag declared her “the next big thing.” She’s very nice in person, writes nice Christian music, and looks nice on covers, and there’s nothing wrong with any of that. But I listened to her music, and heard nothing that made me want to part with money for the album. I felt the same way on her next album, especially when I heard the incredibly lame version of Amy Grant’s “Lead Me On” (what bonehead producer convinced her that she could do a good cover of a song considered, rightly to this personal reviewer, one of the best Christian songs of the last 30 years?). So, I read the CCM hype, but I listened and didn’t buy it, or the record. That’s the way it works.
January 16, 2007 at 16:23
I get so frustrated when I feel like I’m forced to support something simply because it’s Christian. It was like when the Left Behind movies came out, there was a message from Kirk Cameron basically asking for support to put that movie in theaters because it would get out a good message. Whether or not I agree with their message is a different point, but the point I want to make is that it is bad art. So why should I support it?
I feel the same way about a lot of Christian music. I remember a friend asking if I liked Creed, and I said no. And she said “But they’re Christian.” And my response was “So?”
However, I’m also glad to hear the Rolling Stone story too, because it clearly is a force that finds different forms in secular media too.
January 22, 2007 at 03:58
I’ve seen the same thing happen in other settings.
At my school (conservative type Christian School) we have these bands that everyone likes going to their concerts. I’ve found that their music isn’t exactly all that interesting, which is my prerogative. But in terms of musical balance, pitch quality, even tone control they’re not very good at all. But what can you say? People are coming out their concerts, being edified, etc.
And as a musician, I find it fairly sad.
February 4, 2007 at 06:08
It is unfortunate, but you really have a point here. I believe, however, that exists especially because CCM reaches too wide of an audience. All bands that CCM puts anything in the magazine about have a representation of Die-hard fans who will disagree with the reviewer. One reader, for example, critisized CCM for a review that called Krystal Meyers similar to secular artists like Hilary Duff and rated the album by Krystal Meyers as a C-. The reader then writes that everyone she has talked to agrees with her so this must just be a truly terrible review. Fact is, most people just can’t stand to see their favorite artist rated for what they really are. Most of today’s music listeners sadly do not listen for musicality, but instead search for a melody they enjoy. So regardless of what CCM writes, people will always be screaming at them that they are wrong. In order to appease the fanatics, CCM finds it far simpler to just give everything resonably high grades. (December’s issue, which had that particular letter had a low grade of a B, and I know that they didn’t just pick the best albums in the market.) Then CCM hopes that you only listen to your artists that you like and get lucky when you find a good new album. It is unfortunate, but modern media reports what the people want to hear, not the actual truth from a factual standpoint. For example, when writing about Iraq, the headline is always “119 killed in firefight”, but the article has to be read in detail to find that only two of those people were American soldiers, and they died because of an equipment malfunction. (That was not an actual incident.) Overall, however, my point remains, that the world hears what it wants to hear, and not enough fact. CCM (and the entire mass media) need to end this and give it to the world the way it really is. The problem is, most people cannot handle the truth.