Hoffman Forums in Wash. Post: "How a Phoenix record store owner set the audiophile world on fire."

Yes - and the records were always cheaper than the cds. This was the era when Albini declared the cd “the rich man’s 8 track”. Prescient. Records are punk rock. But not $125 records…

 

Not sure if it's already been mentioned but I'ld like to know how much increased traffic has been generated on SHF from this forum being mentioned in a Washington Post article.

Maybe the Gorts can chime in on whether the amount of new members or lurkers has increased after the release of the article.

No wonder this place doesn't need to run ads.

 

I bought a lot of vinyl releases during the 90's from both indies and major labels. Here's a few random ones from my collection.



The 90's was the golden era of vinyl for me: everyone was dumping their collections, so you could pick up old records cheap (I bought a lot of Bowie and the Cure for 50 cents each), and new releases were very cheap. It lasted up until about 2010 or so, but the market gradually got stupid once the hipsters really moved in and then the majors decided to reprint, well, stuff that wasn't very good back then and it clogged up the presses for the indies. I doubt anyone needs a vinyl repress of Kim Wilde's flop album 'Close', but, that's what happened. I gave up collecting it. I've got more than enough good music to listen to.

 

"Proper" journalists publish stories based on anonymous sources literally every day.

 

This is like the Wizard of Oz and then you see what's really behind the curtain.

 

Is @Steve Hoffman Dorothy? I like her the most.

 

Where to begin with this ?

I'm quite sure the crosley crowd get more joy from their records than most people on this forum.
This forum, as has been shown, couldn't tell their nose from their behind as long as it comes in a fancy box with a premium price tag.

 

Touche Master Mark!!........a lot of truth in both statements...lol.

 

Chad n VMPlease CEO. So cool. The spirit of it all. Nailed

 

Proper journalism will only publish anonymous sources under special circumstances and with the approval of a senior editor. A journalist cannot simply publish such an article on their own using anonymous sources. At the highest levels of journalism, the use of anonymous sources is frowned upon unless certain criteria exist.

It it extremely unlikely that either Stereophile or The Absolute Sound or The Washington Post would publish the MoFi story without on the record (no pun intended) sources. Partly out of integrity, and partly out of legal self protection.

AZ Mike, at nearly every turn, displayed his utter ignorance of journalistic standards. Every once in awhile, even a blind squirrel finds a nut - but that doesn’t magically make him a real journalist. And AZ Mike stupidly risked a slander lawsuit by running with his initial video. Thankfully it worked out ok for him. But it was an ignorant risk.

The point being that Fremer and AZ Mike were operating under very different professional rules and standards. One is a journalist, the other is a record store owner with only very basic education levels.

There is plenty of fair criticism to go around of Fremer. That he didn’t publish an improperly sourced article that might bankrupt MoFi is not one of them.

 

Did AZ Mike ever claim to be a journalist? I must have missed that.

And can someone legally pursue a slander case if someone only says “I don’t know if this is true, but an anonymous source told me. . .”?

According to Findlaw:
In a slander lawsuit, you have to prove the following:

• Someone made a false, defamatory statement about you knowing it was a false statement
• The statement does not fall in any privileged category
• The person who published it acted negligently when they published the statement
• You were harmed by the statement

Seems to me any slander lawsuit would fall apart at bullet point 1.

 

I think we are beyond that, given MoF-'s admissions.

 

I agree, I just don’t get the criticism at this point using “ignorant”, “stupidly”, and “only very basic education levels”.

Reeks of condescension to me.

 

I don't understand you post. Sites don't get paid just by people visiting unless they run ads or charge a subscription. In some cases you might actually have to pay more to host it because of the increased usage.

 

Thanks. That's an interesting read!