Says it’s just as amazed as everyone else that its managers would threaten bloggers to take down mostly positive reviews of "rough tracks" from their upcoming album.
Yesterday I mentioned how the ugly side of Metallica had reared its head once again with reports that its managers at Q Prime had threatened music reviewers with legal action if they did not remove reviews of "rough tracks" heard in a music preview listening session of their upcoming album.
The best part is that the reviews were mostly POSITIVE!
The story behind the removal of the article runs as follows:
Metallica held an album listening party for selected music journalists in London this Wednesday past. One of the writers was kind enough to write a piece about the album which, if you were lucky enough to read it before it was taken down, was full of praise about a return to form. At no point was the writer ask[ed] to sign a non-disclosure agreement. The Quietus and other websites ran pieces on the album, but were quickly contacted by Metallica’s management via a third party and told to remove the articles. The Quietus kept our article up the longest and, as no non-disclosure agreement had been signed, [was] not prepared to remove it merely due to the demands of Metallica’s management. We only eventually removed the article earlier today to protect the professional interests of the writer concerned (the piece was written anonymously). Seems Metallica’s fear of the internet shows no sign of abating.
So Metallica, having "re-surfaced on Tuesday after a few weeks on tour in Europe," learned of the whole imbroglio and decided to poste a response late yesterday on its website.
Lucky for us because apparently "rarely" do they "…feel the desire/need to respond to the ‘blogosphere,’" as if all their fans, if any are left, are into CNN or MSNBC.
From their blog:
While we occasionally enjoy reading the various comments, rumors, speculation, reviews, gossip and all the good that the internet brings, rarely do we feel the desire/need to respond to the "blogosphere" . . . hey, everyone is entitled to have their thoughts and opinions, right? However, once we re-surfaced on Tuesday after a few weeks on tour in Europe, we were informed that someone at Q Prime (our managers) had made the error of asking a few publications to take down reviews of the rough mixes from the new record that were posted on their sites. Our response was "WHY?!!! Why take down mostly positive reviews of the new material and prevent people from getting psyched about the next record. . . that makes no sense to us!”" So after a few rounds of managerial ear spank and sentencing everyone at Q Prime to 20 push-ups each, we figured why not take matters into our own hands and just post the links here on our site. Kerrang, Metal Hammer, The Quietus.
You see, we have maintained an "in the press" section here on Metallica.com for many years now, posting links to reviews of shows, album and DVD releases, and various other tidbits we’ve come across while surfing around. Some good, some not so good, but we put ‘em all up . . . sort of the same way we treat our message boards on this site . . . welcoming all feedback.
So in the spirit of keeping this section current, we’ve put as many of the reviews of the rough mixes of the new record up here as we could find. If we missed any, let us know . . . and in the meantime, we’re always adding, so peruse at your leisure.
So there you have it. Q Prime was sentenced to 20 pushups p/person and a bout of ear spankings (whatever that is), restoring harmony to the world.
But, it does beg the question: WWPJD – What would Pearl Jam do?
Do you think other bands would’ve had such an odd disconnect or "miscommunication" between it, management, and fans?
Related Posts
- Deja Vu? Metallica Attacks the Internet AGAIN, Censors Album Reviews
- Metallica on Album Leak to BitTorrent: ‘Happy Days’
- Metallica Seeking Help from Pro-File-Sharing Trent Reznor?
- Adverse impact of DRM on CD reviews
- Metallica Licenses Catalog to iTunes Music Store
Loading ...
Well metallica dose have a long way to go to rebuilt trust with the people of the internetz. But I kinda want to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one. The move was so bazaar and boneheaded that it did reek of overzealous bureaucrats. Plus they gave the world the phrase “ear spank” and that is a good start to reconciliation in my book.
Why take down any reviews good or bad that will cause fans to get excited about the album? Reporters can get really scared when attacked and this is the USA where we believe in ‘freedom of the press’ after all.. If you write something and your facts are correct stand on it!
metallica can suck my fat yellow hairy sack. I will steal their music and then delete it unheard just because i can/
^ What he said!! BUMP!
well i guess that is good. i was getting a little worried that the other article about them changing their ways was just an effort to save face just so they could pull stuff like this blog thing later. gamer is right it does reek of bureaucracy and not a band’s choice.
I think it reeks of a marketing gimmick. I didn’t even know metallica was releasing a new album until this article. How easy is it for the band to just blame it on “the man”. Just to give the impression that their not assholes and the whole thing is managements fault. Maybe the Napster thing was managements fault too. And Mephitic I don’t recommend d/l the album and then deleting it just to prove a point. First of all who would you be proving it too. and secondly they’d probably track the download through the RIAA semi-secret spy network and the album would go that much higher up the charts. I really don’t want to have to listen to the single off the album everywhere I go.