I like music critics because they have been vetted by a professional editor as being worthy of being given space in a publication. Going to internet discussion sites for honest opinion, competent writing, or rational thought is a waste of time. Why should I believe anything that any old boob says on an unedited website? Not that I necessarily believe what reviewers say, but it is very easy to quickly tell whether or not I'm reading something of worth.

As a musician, I've had extremely positive reviews and they have helped me in getting gigs and in getting newspapers to write articles about me. I've also had reviews written by people who don't know anything about the type of music I play (the hudy-gurdy was once described as a type of bagpipe!), and these reviews just get ignored. I've never had a purely negative review, but if I did I'd just ignore it, too. For the most part, they disappear in fairly short order. If I don't keep a review in circulation, it doesn't generally stay there. Anyone who makes a decision about music based on one negative review deserves what they get, anyway.