At 06:22 PM 2/7/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> It is entirely up to the editor, who is
> influenced by the publisher and their
> concerns about the market they are targeting.
I'd never presume about your experiences, so *please* don't presume about
ours. AMG has never received any type of suggestion, concerning direction
or inclusions, from any outside source (including our publisher), and would
refuse to accept any given. Our publisher accepts exactly what we give
them -- which of course means that any and all complaints about inclusions
or treatment can be laid at our feet.
As John is a full-timer, or much closer to it than my freelancing self, let
me clarify a few things.
The bulk of AMG's writers do not receive assignments. We request articles
- a review of this record, a bio of this artists - and they approve/deny.
I have never had a request denied, even if it was a request to write an
article on a limited run noise record of 1000 or 2000 copies (i.e. for a
limited interest/audience.) They give their writers a lot of freedom, and
I've never received a "Re-write that article" or "Don't write about XXXX"
request.
Given that, I was not involved in the editing of AMG's Electronica guide,
so I have no say about what was included there. However, as John said, it
isn't a guide to techno. It's a guide to electronica. For better or
worse, that term includes people like Moby, Fluke, The Chemical Brothers,
and other popular electronica acts. Since the writers tend to be techno
fans, a lot of these electronica acts get grudging or negative reviews, but
in order for the book to complete its purported purpose, these reviews have
to be included.
Josh Landau
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
