As to Ian not being her "manager," of course there is no official definition of this term, so if they both say he wasn't her manager, then he wasn't. But someone who books the tours, acts as tour manager, co-ordinates the album releases, and does much of the pr (eg. shoots the photos, shops the band to contacts, and gets CD cuts onto fRoots samplers), is pretty much doing the work of an artist manager, no?

I should point out that it was George who first referred to a "fRoots campaign on [Athena's] behalf," not me. With two cuts on two different fRoots CDs, several of those "smaller" features, fRoots sponsoring her 2006 tour, and her being interviewed and discussed in two of only twenty features to be placed on the fRoots website, this one , and this one, I can understand his impression, despite the fact that she's never had a "main" feature.

Actually, anyone could be forgiven for thinking there was a full-fledged pr campaign. In that last article, for example, the producer of the Doc we're talking about says that he'd never have heard of Athena except for all the great coverage in fRoots, which is essentially the only reason he gives for picking her: "we were looking at fRoots to work out who the other one should be, to find a face and music that would complement these other artists, and we found Athena...." It seems my observation that all the fRoots coverage "explains her becoming suddenly well-known on the folk scene" was pretty much right on. Again, despite the lack of a "main" feature.

That article, by the way, is from fRoots 298 (this month!) and Ian wrote it. In it, Athena gets more coverage than Seth Lakeman and Kate Rusby combined, and more than Eliza Carthy, too. She is interviewed at some length. So it's not quite true that all the coverage of Athena since 2005 was by other writers--there's been a hefty dose by Ian. And who made the editorial call to focus so much on her? Was it her friend, her fan, her media sponsor, her former (tour) manager, the article's writer, or the magazine's editor-in-chief?

Oops, they're the same bloke!

Seriously, I'm sure no-one doubts Ian's genuine enthusiasm. But when your business and your reputation as a pundit revolve around your enthusiasm, it's no longer the case that you do things purely "because you're a genuine enthusiast for it." You also do things to secure and protect your business and your reputation.

For example, once your business decides to sponsor someone, it's in your best interest for that person to succeed, even after the sponsorship is officially over. This will ensure that others will enter similar relationships with fRoots--"hey, she did it, and look where it got her!"

And once you've introduced someone around the scene, and been a pretty visible champion for them, it wouldn't do your personal reputation as a trend-setter any good if they were to crash and burn.

This is why one's natural tendency to be enthusiastic can easily be helped along by self-interest, when such editorial decisions are afoot. This can even happen unconsciously, which is why sometimes the only thing to do is turn over control to someone else...as Ian says he has.

I appreciate Ian's mentioning those two previous cases in which he was romantically involved with an artist and turned editorial control over to others. I've no reason to believe that the romantic angle has any relevance to the Athena case, but it seems to be the first thing Ian thought of. (Well, you can't blame him...just LOOK at her, will you? As my mother would say, "you should BE so lucky!")

In the end, Ian is quite right that it's difficult when you wear so many hats. I'm sure his mechanisms to ensure objectivity are fine. And his mag's a fun read, too!