Is Journalism and Theater Reviews now dead

[laughingplace]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 12:27am

Just noticing not as much  reviews from USATODAY etc

[yankeefan7]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 8:59am

The major ones like the NY newspapers still review all shows that open. 

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 9:00am

I fondly remember David Merrick's phony reviewer ploy. Great fun and pure genius.

[madbrian]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 9:01am

"Is Journalism and Theater Reviews now dead"

 

Yes.  Yes, they is.

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 9:03am

Instead in the newspapers the reviews can become vlogs on YouTube. Many other people have been doing this. Like patty and Emily...

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 9:04am

Yes. They are.

[EchoParker]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 9:13am

madbrian said: ""Is Journalism and Theater Reviews now dead"

 

Yes.  Yes, they is.

 

Mad Brian, you stole the words out of my mouth. 

 

"Just noticing not as much reviews..."

 

Yes, Journalism, and theatre reviews, and English... they is ALL dead. 

 

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 9:43am

[HogansHero]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 9:55am

setting aside the fun everyone seems to be having with their exceptional grammar prowess, and without regard to USA Today, which I've never looked at except when a hotel gives it to me and which I don't think has ever comprehensively covered the theatre, there is more theatre journalism today than at any time in human history.

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 9:57am

^ Interestingly, Hogan, I don't disagree—but I also think the effect that it has on its readership (first, ticket sales, and secondly, the actual number of theatre journalism readers) is at an all-time low. I think we're at a quality versus quantity divide right now.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 10:08am

What is the "it" you are referring to? 

I think that, thanks to the internet, more people are reading more reviews (all along the quality continuum) than at any time previously. 

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 10:16am

The "it" in my previous post refers to theatre journalism.

And yes, I don't disagree that more people are reading reviews than ever (or, at the very least, are able to), but what good is having a million people read a review if only a handful are going to actually feel inclined to pick up tickets to a show after reading a piece that interests them or a love letter to a production? I could list far too many shows over the past few years that saw critical raves but ended up failing to garner an audience. 

[haterobics]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 10:22am

BroadwayConcierge said: " I could list far too many shows over the past few years that saw critical raves but ended up failing to garner an audience."

 

You could say the same for most 95%+ positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes compared to their box office receipts.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 11:32am

thanks for the clarification. That makes the most sense but I wasn't sure.

To me, you are making a point about influence rather than quantity or quality. I think they are quite unrelated and (as close as I can decipher) the OP was asking about the latter.

I think, by the way, that in the broader sense the access to more theatre reviews and other news today has had an enormously positive effect on garnering audiences for smaller shows. And I think that the proliferation of reviews, news and social media has led to a parallel proliferation of off and especially off off shows: there are also more of these shows now than ever (or at least than there were when I was a youngin'.

[MadonnaMusical]

Posted: 4/18/16 at 5:08pm

laughingplace said: "Just noticing not as much  reviews from USATODAY etc

 

"

Shouldn't the title of this thread be "Are Journalism and Theatre Reviews now dead?"

also it should be "Just noticing; not as many reviews from USA TODAY etc."

I normally don't correct people's grammar, but I felt that it was appropriately ironic due to the topic of conversation. Now I will stop being a troll. Please forgive me for this moment of weakness.