Anyone else notice how completely retarded and biased Metacritic is?
 

I used to use Metacritic as a resource to review new music for the past fourteen to eighteen months, but lately, I'm starting to wonder exactly how impartial these motherfuckers are. Here's just a taste of their bullshit:

One Day As A Lion: One Day As A Lion [EP] (2008): Reviews

The "average" score is 80, but there are two reviews that clock under that. Not only this, but it's the Metacritic staff that are the ones to assign reviews scores in the first fucking place. I've noticed that they don't report too many poor reviews on indie/electronica albums and the editors have seemed to develop their own tastes. The reviews are weighted to give higher precendence to sources which the editors find appealing. I thought the purpose of this site was to establish objective and encompassing reviews of albums, not to promote their own musical tastes. I guess there's politics there too.

I will never guage my taste in music based upon what these fuckers tell me ever again.

Fuck Metacritic.

That's an odd take on averages they've got there, unless they only go in 10's, and then thats a bit silly because it implies a percentage which it isn't at all.

Strikes me as a bit stripped down, if i was wondering whether to listen to an album i doubt this site would make me decide either way.

It's always entertaining to see one critic get outraged by another. How is it the you're being any less absolute and unyielding than the critical object of your disdain? If our musical passion & appreciation were a substance you could attempt to cut through with a knife, it would be made of concrete. We all (me included) choose to be the knife's will rather than accepting the solid fortress that is our personal resolve. Musical critique is all an expressive joke. At the end of the day all that we have is our own two ears accompanied by a single will that decides what we listen to.

Loyalty with respect to artistic favor is the opposite of critical integrity.

I don't get exactly what PMO was saying but having a look at the site myself the issue I'm seeing (if its based on a scale of 100) is that there isn't any sort of Z-score we can convert all the ratings to.

That being said it looks like the editors haphazardly convert other reviews to their number system with no actual math, just a sort of "eh this look like a 75 rating" attitude and if anything thats where the bias comes in (by proxy of laziness)

I'm not reviewing One Day As A Lion. I'm saying that Metacritic is a pile of garbage.

Fack off.

BUT, you are being critical and that is precisely my point. You merely find your opinion 180 degrees different from theirs. No escape.

I've always been in the habit of making my own opinions about music, film etc.

I generally don't pay attention to other critics.

Yes but it's not as fun to say that ;)

If you average the numbers together it comes to 75.751. If they round up to the nearest 10 it would be 80. This would be a fair way to do it if they did it for all their averages, but they don't. In fact I decided to click a random album to see what the average review is according to them and then figuring it up. I ended up with Alphabeat: This Is Alphabeat. Their average according to them is 76. The scores are 100, 80, 80, 60, 60, 60. The real average is 73.3 repeated. Round down to the nearest whole and we have 73. A whole 3 points off. Interesting. Alkaline Trio: Agony & Irony's scores average to 68.1, but the average they list is 71. Its 3.1 points off, 3 if you round. It seems like the average score on the site is always a bit high.

The averages are skewed deliberately to spread out scores. So high rating albums are rated higher and low rated ones are rated lower.