Fader Fallout
So I wrote an article for Clamor Magazine some months ago which wound up being titled How Much Did You Pay For Your Identity?: The Big Business of Selling Individuality to Kids. The first three paragraphs consisted of a brief look into a magazine called The Fader and its connections to a marketing and promotions firm called Cornerstone. I thought the paragraphs were well-researched, but they prompted an angry letter from one Eddie Brannan, Creative Director at The Fader. Not long after this exchange between Jason, one of my editors at Clamor, and Eddie wound down, I received emails from Cornerstone pushing a pop-punk band from San Diego. Oops. The guys in Lucky 7 seem like nice enough people. I met them once or twice and they were always genial chaps, but that band and my site are not now - nor have they ever been, nor are they ever likely to be - any kind of fit. In addition, Cornerstone is apparently pushing Sugarcult as well, and in my world, Sugarcult's last claim to fame was borrowing rather substantial portions of Vena Cava's artwork (and I consider Corey, April and Patrick to be good friends), so, without further delay, on with the show ...
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 03:47:32 -0400
Subject: Fader magazine article
From: Eddie Brannan <eddie@thefader.com>
To: <info@clamormagazine.org>
Status:
dear sir/madam
i recently came across scott puckett's article on your website about the magazine for which i work. I would like to address the issues raised in tnis piece.
for three years i and my staff have striven to be balanced, fair and objective. we collectively decline to attend our parent company's weekly policy meetings for this very reason. we champion independent bands and labels, most of whom would never appear on the radar screens of our publishers' company. the most recent issue featured two unsigned (and therefore unmarketable/promotable in corporate terms) acts on the front and back covers. we cover a huge range of subjects, in particular social/environmental issues (diamond wars in sierra leone, water privatisation in central america, favela renewal programs in urban brasil, contemporary social/cultural outlooks in north africa, to name just a few recent articles), that would never fall anywhere near a marketing company's remit. furthermore we have been nominated for several awards for original photography and we provide a rare and respected forum for documentary and fine art photography, particularly from new and emerging talents, which again has nothing to do with the day-to-day interests of our publishers.
Furthermore, despite what is stated in your piece, no-one on the editorial staff shares duties with, or is paid by, our publisher's company. The only people on our masthead who do are clearly identified as the publishers (two individuals) and the associate publisher (one individual). our publisher, cornerstone promotion, is a small independent company started by two 26 year-old guys in 1996. The magazine is their first and only venture into publishing. They started it because they wanted to have a cool magazine, and they still run it on that basis. We continue to make a loss because of our extravagant print process. It's hardly the last bastion of corporate greed or any great cash cow for anybody, including our editorial staff who work long hours for peanuts.
more than anything though, we at the fader would never print a piece that did not attempt to be fair and balanced, that didn't question sources other than the writer, that didn't try to pass off some cursory internet search as fact-checking, that didn't, essentially, pass muster on even the most basic standards of journalism, like this one.
i would have welcomed the opportunity to respond to the questions raised by your contributor. i fully accept that they are valid questions. however without the opportunity to address them and to illustrate the enormous and tiring lengths we go to avoid being tainted in the way this article asserts that we are, i feel you have in effect slandered us.
i am extremely disappointed by this piece. i and a very small team have striven to create a good, interesting, fresh, intelligent, opinionated, non-corporate, non-commercial magazine in a country where such a thing is extremely rare. we have chosen to document issues that most newsstand publications would shy away from for fear of their being "too political," "controversial" etc. and that is a testament not only to our efforts but also to the tolerance and support of our publishers. just one example of the leeway they have granted us: we decline to poll our readers on their race, making us virtually unique in the so called "lifestyle" publications, because we do not wish those who advertise with us to make decisions on the basis of what we consider an irrelevant factor. most magazine publishers, and most marketers, would consider this information essential.
i am extremly dismayed by your piece. it makes unfounded allegations and is based upon pure speculation, prejudice and poor research. i would be interested to hear your response to this letter, and hope you will go to the trouble of addressing it, and also of forwarding it to mr puckett.
yours
--
eddie brannan creative director
the fader magazine
71 west 23rd st suite 903 nyc 10010
t 212 741 7100 f 212 741 4747
http://www.thefader.com
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 00:36:15 -0400
From: J450N <jason@clamormagazine.org>
To: Eddie Brannan <eddie@thefader.com>
Subject: Re: Fader magazine article
Eddie,
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I'm glad you wrote us with your concerns. I'm not sure where to begin in addressing your letter, because although you expressed frustration, disappointment, and disgust with the piece, you did not assert that any of the claims made by our contributor were false. Scott Puckett claimed that the bands your publisher represents often end up on the cover of your magazine, which is provably true. He noted that your magazine does contain some excellent left-leaning material, but none of us (editors included) think that this puts any of us above critique, which is why the author felt at liberty to exercise his right to speculate, theorize, or otherwise present questions worth considering. Puckett never claimed that editorial duties of your magazine were shared with or influenced by your parent company, but simply that the names at Cornerstone and the Fader's were the same. And while you mention that your publishers allow you the freedom to do the stories you want to pursue, you make no mention of the pieces that your publishers "suggest" that you publish. Perhaps this is a direction that I might have taken, but the author did not. That y'all continue to lose money each issue begs the question of who's paying the bills and when will the well dry up? That's also another tangent we're not really discussing here.
You made some claims at the end of your letter that cite Clamor and Puckett for slandering the Fader, and I suggest you possibly reconsider this guns-blazing accusation. First, published defamation is libel, and oral defamation is slander. Now that the terms are straight, in order for it to be libel, you would have to prove that this piece had components of actual malice or a reckless disregard for the truth, which I think you would be hard-pressed to establish. Finally, I quote the author of the piece in suggesting that you, in acting in an official capacity for the Fader, might be the subject of a lawsuit yourself since you have, "impugned my (Puckett's) professional reputation to a magazine which retains my services and that communication has been transmitted to more than three people which meets the legal standard necessary for the number of viewings."
In any event, I'm glad to discuss these issues further if you like over the phone. You can reach me at XXX.XXX.XXXX between 7-11pm Monday through Thursday.
best,
jason kucsma, co-editor/founder Clamor Magazine.
--
finally ... a lifestyle magazine for the rest of us.
www.clamormagazine.org
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 11:05:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Fader magazine article
From: Eddie Brannan <eddie@thefader.com>
To: J450N <jason@clamormagazine.org>
Status:
> Eddie,
>
> Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I'm glad you wrote us
> with your concerns. I'm not sure where to begin in addressing your
> letter, because although you expressed frustration, disappointment,
> and disgust with the piece, you did not assert that any of the claims
> made by our contributor were false.
I most certainly did and I most certainly do.
> Scott Puckett claimed that the
> bands your publisher represents often end up on the cover of your
> magazine, which is provably true. He noted that your magazine does
> contain some excellent left-leaning material, but none of us (editors
> included) think that this puts any of us above critique, which is why
> the author felt at liberty to exercise his right to speculate,
> theorize, or otherwise present questions worth considering.
I don't expect it or anything to place me abocve critique, but to completely overlook the non-commercial aspects of our editorial coverage is to paint and incoplete picture, and one which in the context of your article is thoroughly and intentionally misleading.
> Puckett
> never claimed that editorial duties of your magazine were shared with
> or influenced by your parent company, but simply that the names at
> Cornerstone and the Fader's were the same.
Not true. As I pointed out only the publishers names are the same. None of the editorial staff share responsibilites with Cornerstone. This ewas clearly stated in my response.
> And while you mention
> that your publishers allow you the freedom to do the stories you want
> to pursue, you make no mention of the pieces that your publishers
> "suggest" that you publish. Perhaps this is a direction that I might
> have taken, but the author did not. That y'all continue to lose
> money each issue begs the question of who's paying the bills and when
> will the well dry up? That's also another tangent we're not really
> discussing here.
We, like most small independent magazines, have a publisher that is prepared to invest in us because they anticipate that the magazine will one day earn them a profit. For sure the profile of cornerstone promotion is enhanced by their publishing this magazine. Furthermore, thay have and certainly will continue to work with some of the bands that we cover. Cornerstone is a "cool" company that naturally works with some of the "cool" bands that we at the fader tend to like (the strokes etc). But to infer from that that we are ordered by the pubslishers to cover these bands is imstaken. It just isn't the case. Nor does editorial coverage in the fader EVER get pitched as part pf what cornerstone could do for a potential client. It juts isn't the case. I've been working in magazine publisng ten years, always for small indie mags, and when I was approached by cornerstone to run the fader I was and remain absolutely adamant that my independence wasn't to be challenged. Believe me I choose to work for crap wages at a small magazine in exchange for creative and editorial freedom. If I was inclined to sell out in that way there are a lot of far higher bidders I'm more than adequately qualified to whore for. I choose not to.
> You made some claims at the end of your letter that cite Clamor and
> Puckett for slandering the Fader, and I suggest you possibly
> reconsider this guns-blazing accusation. First, published defamation
> is libel, and oral defamation is slander. Now that the terms are
> straight, in order for it to be libel, you would have to prove that
> this piece had components of actual malice or a reckless disregard
> for the truth, which I think you would be hard-pressed to establish.
> Finally, I quote the author of the piece in suggesting that you, in
> acting in an official capacity for the Fader, might be the subject of
> a lawsuit yourself since you have, "impugned my (Puckett's)
> professional reputation to a magazine which retains my services and
> that communication has been transmitted to more than three people
> which meets the legal standard necessary for the number of viewings."
Oh please! you talk to me about guns-blazing accusations after printing the piece puckett wrote about us? To threaten suit over a letter to the editor in which I endeavored to answer point by point allegations made against my organisation in an article is something I've never encountered in my professional life and is certainly somethig I would consider far, far beneath me. I don't believe I'll be calling you. Your response and that of your writer reveals there'll be little point. I am even more disappointed in you and your publication now than I was before, and I don't think I care to have anything further to do with you.
--
eddie brannan creative director
the fader magazine
71 west 23rd st suite 903 nyc 10010
t 212 741 7100 f 212 741 4747
http://www.thefader.com
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 17:02:54 -0400
From: Anne Brazeal <anne@cornerstonedigital.com>
To: Anne Brazeal <anne@cornerstonedigital.com>
Subject: Lucky 7 - Feeling Lucky Punk?
Parts/Attachments:
1 OK ~54 lines Text (charset: ISO-8859-1)
2 Shown ~62 lines Text (charset: ISO-8859-1)
----------------------------------------
[ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-1" character set. ]
[ Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set. ]
[ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
Hello!
Cornerstone Digital is proud to announce we’re working with Lucky 7 for their recently released self-titled album. This San Diego pop-punk band has built their reputation and their fan base on irresistible songs and high-energy live shows. Drawing as much from Elvis Costello as the Ramones and Green Day, they’ve crafted the kind of hits that hook fans based entirely on their resplendent talent.
Need proof? Listen to California Girl, their first single (and the title track from the ucoming film “Who’s Your Daddy”):
http://www.redmusic.com/streams/Lucky7_CaliforniaGirl.ram
http://www.redmusic.com/streams/Lucky7_CaliforniaGirl.asx
They haven’t relied on any major label machine or gimmickry, let alone luck, to get where they are today. Lucky 7 have the skills to create undeniably catchy pop-punk anthems. Fans have latched onto this band and propelled them largely through the success of their tracks on mp3.com to being named one of the top internet bands every year since 1999. They’ve played sold out tours on their home turf and as far away as Australia where there co-headlined the Warped Tour Down-Under. Lucky 7 are making their mark on the pop-punk scene and picking up more supporters every step of the way.
Please let your site’s visitor’s check out this undeniable hit as Lucky 7 puts out another debilitating California colored track. Let me know if you’re putting it up so I can get you set up with the latest for Lucky 7. Also, if you want to do a review, send me your address so I can get a copy out to you. We’re going to have the video and all the news first and want to set up contests, interviews, images, features, audio streams and tons of exclusives. If you’re interested just shoot me an email and we can get started!
Thanks,
Anne (anne@cornerstonedigital.com)
--
Anne Brazeal
Cornerstone Digital
71 West 23rd Street, Suite 903
New York, NY 10010
P: +1 212 741 7100 x 227
F: +1 212 741 4747
Sugarcult – Start Static
Flaming Lips – Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots
Lucky 7 – s/t
Ben Kweller – Sha Sha
SR-71 – Tomorrow
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 16:20:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Scott Puckett <puckett@crash.cts.com>
To: Anne Brazeal <anne@cornerstonedigital.com>
Subject: Re: Lucky 7 - Feeling Lucky Punk?
[ The following text is in the "X-UNKNOWN" character set. ]
[ Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set. ]
[ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
Anne,
Just out of curiosity, have you even looked at my Web site?
--Puckett
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 19:48:28 -0400
From: Anne Brazeal <anne@cornerstonedigital.com>
To: Scott Puckett <puckett@crash.cts.com>
Subject: Re: Lucky 7 - Feeling Lucky Punk?
[ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-1" character set. ]
[ Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set. ]
[ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
Puckett-
Yes. Yes, I have looked at your website. I checked it out again today in fact. I thought as someone who lived in San Diego covering punk-esque music for 30 years you might be interested in a punk-ish band from San Diego. Even if you aren't adding any new reviews I thought you might want to do something with the band.
Obviously you don't.
Actually someone recommended the site to me, wanted me to check it out. I liked it.
You're not interested. I won't send anything again. No problem.
Anne
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 17:41:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: Scott Puckett <puckett@crash.cts.com>
To: Anne Brazeal <anne@cornerstonedigital.com>
Subject: Re: Lucky 7 - Feeling Lucky Punk?
[ The following text is in the "X-UNKNOWN" character set. ]
[ Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set. ]
[ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]
For point of clarification - these days, I deal in punk. Not punkish. Not punky. Not punk-like. Punk. I hate pop-punk. I hate what it has done to music and kids' imaginations. I hate that where once punk was about telling someone's truth, it is now about cashing in. I hate that pop-punk has effectively commodified the dreams of the disenfranchised and transformed them into nothing more than the opportunity to get paid instead of finding like-minded folks who might make the loneliness easier to bear for a while.
Lucky 7 seem like really nice guys - I met them a few times. Their stage banter needs work (I'll never forget hearing the lead singer shout, "I wanna see you all go off on this next song!" during a show at a teen center) but there is, as a much better writer than myself once put it, no there there.
I am interested in San Diego music. I started my own label and put money into a few records. Most of my friends are musicians - I drove a lot of them home after shows. Some of them crashed on my couch. There are plenty of phenomenal punk bands in San Diego - tiltWheel, Watch It Burn, Tori Cobras, Furious IV, Spare Change and the like. Most of them aren't particularly photogenic. Nor do they possess much cross-over appeal. Nor are they particularly marketable. They're just godlike and genuine in every way that matters.
I'm glad you liked the site - I say that honestly and without a trace of snarkiness. However, I think you might have missed part of the point. Lately, I've been writing about bands like Hot Water Music. American Nightmare. Reach The Sky. Dillinger Four. Small Brown Bike. American Steel. Maybe you're familiar with them, maybe not. However, if you are familiar with them and you recommended Lucky 7 to me on the basis of regional affilation (and before anyone says anything about supporting my scene, I've bled for my scene, gone broke for my scene and been sued for my scene - I can't think of many other people who have been that supportive), you should have known better. If you aren't familiar with them, you might find it hard to know which sites might be interested in Lucky 7 and which sites will respond like I'm doing right now.
I hope this note finds you well.
--Puckett