I've rarely bought records solely on the strength of a review, whether in print or on radio or television, but reviews are a useful part of the consumer's toolkit. To that we can now add YouTube, MySpace and the other networking sites; plus, of course, the performers' own websites if they take the trouble to set up and maintain such things (which I'd certainly recommend). You won't get considered commentary in such places, but sound samples are obviously helpful.

Naturally, reviewers vary in quality just as performers do. I occasionally review cds for Stirrings, but only if I feel I sufficiently well-informed to do justice to the genre concerned and have time to listen to it repeatedly in order to make a properly considered assessment. Some people prefer to discuss initial impressions, which I daresay is also a valid approach, though it doesn't suit me. I've been the subject of reviews in my time, so I know what it's like on both sides of the fence.

It isn't necessarily easy to find reasonably literate people who understand the purpose of reviews, though, and sometimes we get writeups that aren't very helpful; occasionally, for instance, somebody who seemed promising will turn in something so badly written or off-topic that we can't print it in fairness to the reviewee. Whether a recording gets a good, bad or neutral review isn't the issue here (performers who can't handle an unfavourable review probably shouldn't be putting out cds) but any review should be honest, informative and factually accurate, which requires due thought and consideration.

That's true of of both the national and local press. Because the genre is relatively small, the bulk of print reviews of folk music cds (however you choose to define folk music) will appear in the regional and local magazines where the reviewers are likely to be local club and concert goers rather than experienced journalists, but then so are the readers at whom the reviews are directed. Stirrings never seems to be short of review material, so evidently plenty of performers or performers' agents think the exercise worthwhile. As a relatively small publication, we tend to cover a higher proportion of 'own label' releases than do the larger magazines, which are perhaps more inclined to concentrate on the (relatively) bigger labels.

I don't see the value of press coverage as being diminished by the increasing availability of review or 'sample' material in other media; rather that the various options complement each other. While the independent folk music press survives (which it will do for as long as there are people prepared to devote unpaid time to producing it, and while there are people who will buy copies or pay for advertising - print costs must be covered somehow) reviews will, I think, remain a significant part of the service it provides.