Amy Phillips’ 44 word article posted thursday linking to a podcast in which the band explains themselves was a little too cookie cutter for my tastes. Let’s see the checklist: Open with a question? Check. Indie band mentioned(regardless of whether or not it’s about an indie band at the core of the news)? Check. Resized Press Photo? Check. Superfluous Links to Band Website? Check. Conversational Style? Check. Snarky Sarcasm Indicate Through italics? Check. The article is so short, I mean look at it! I wouldn’t be suprised if there is a template guide to writing a pitchfork news post and this is what it boils down to. The Title, link to non-pitchfork-hosted material and post information nearly adds up to the amount of words in the body of the article. Such brevity reveals the underlying ugly issue that calls into question the usefulness of the article itself: Who cares? I suspect that indulgence or corporate shilling is the driving force behind this shortest article ever. I don’t see any other explanation, let alone use for this article.

I did find one good thing. A Google Image Search for “Amy Phillips” returns a predominance of attractive women. Bonus! Meanwhile, a Google Image Search for “Pitchfork” returns nothing but uglys.