well hot press is a kiddies magazine really, isn't it?... it is also corrupt...

you make a valid point but i find they rate almost everything too highly and that there is some seriously bad research and journalism in both the reviews section and the rest of the magazine...

...the magazine has its place, just not for me...

Hot Press has articles about music?

there needs to be another irish magazine thats actually about music that comes oout regularly cos hotpress is shiite

But there is already - Foggy Notions, which is excellent.

people still read magazines?

Some people also listen to commercial radio by no choice of their own.

i am finding foggy notions increasingly unsatisfactory as well though hats off to them for doing what they're doing and trying to get the machine running monthly...

...also, the latest free CD from kranky was a Godsend... the cd's were becoming very indie-pop here today gone tomorrow type affairs with no bite to them...

...the writing could do with having a little humour...

"people still read magazines?"

of course they do, i would buy q magazine monthly, i'm not doubting the dip in quality but i still think its decent for reviewing new albums.

hotpress is very easy to abuse, its the only big selling magazine in the country that the majority of people have heard of...i would still buy it on the odd occasion for the reason that they have accessibility to interviewing global acts more so than say a smaller outfit....i dont think its particularly good but then the majority of internet journalism is sh*te, its like 100 people at a party airing their views carelessly on things as opposed to measured opinions written down and thought about....plus there is no accountability there...

I just wanna say that I do actually like Hot Press. A lot of the articles and interviews are really good, but their Irish bias in the reviews section pisses me off no end - I mean, how can you rate an average Delorentos single and slate an excellent Thom Yorke one on the same page? I know critics will always have their own opinions, but this happens consistently - the Irish acts get far too much leeway and not enough honest criticism.

But the NME promote any sort of british s**te as being "the next big thing" too. It happens in most every country I'd imagine, not just here.

Probably true, but the NME is a total waste of space and has been for years. Unlike Hot Press, it doesn't strive to be anything more than a collection of bite sized articles and an overload of photos on confusing layout.

Pity Melody Maker dissapeared - you could rely on the reviews of many of their writers, even if they were a tad flowery at times! Some of them still work for Uncut, but I got sick of buying it due to their over-emphasis on films, If I wanted a movie mag, I'd buy one, but I don't.

the NME is a better magazine than Hotpress. At least the NME doesn't pretend to be something it isn't. It's funny and current. Of course, it has loads of faults, but not enough to put it on a par with Hotpress, which is just a ridiculous piece of work.

The only music magazine I read religiously is Observer Music Monthly. Everything else, I just read online for free, which makes more sense to me.

You can't read Hot Press on-line for free, so your comment doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't see why you think Hot Press is a "ridiculous piece of work" either. Can you qualify that?

"I don't see why you think Hot Press is a "ridiculous piece of work" either. Can you qualify that?"

Um, the writers aren't of a very good quality + from talking to people who write for/have written for the magazine, reviews are edited to fit in with an editorial bias/policy + A lot of the pages are sponsored, so you have to question a commercial/advertorial bias + I don't see why a music magazine has to be full of dodgy political polemics, sport, random interviews with people who have nothing to do with music + Olaf T is a joke + The social pages are completely lame + there's too much influence from PR and record labels into the mag's content + there seems to be no desire to promote or even vaguely cultivate an interest in newness or breaking genres = a ridiculous piece of work.

OK! I see what you mean - I do like the political and sports though, but that's just a personal preference. It did start out like that however, so they never claimed to be purely a music magazine. As for the rest - I'd agree totally. It would be nice to see an Irish music mag that focuses mainly on the Irish scene and unbiased by Record co's and PR, but I don't think there's the scene to support it - there's only really a handful of decent bands in the country and most of them have day jobs unfortunately, so they don't have the time or money to focus 100% on their music.

I think magazines are kind of heading for retirement. It would be a pretty dumb business decision to establish one.

It would be a pretty dumb business decision to establish one.

Completely agree Una, evolution of business and media.....I still like the idea of browsing magazines and reading different views...the internet is so vast, and there is almost an opinion to fit everybody's taste in everything...takes from the controversey that tradionally followed old music hacks around, Mick Wall, HST etc....no mystique, just lots of yap........

Olaf T is a joke btw..agree on that too...the older HP heads are bitter and twisted little people with dated views.........

I think there's still a place and a role for a magazine like Hot Press - I think Una did a lot of spot-on nail-on-head hitting; it's hard to tell the real reviews from the infomercials. And its social issues slant is unbelievably dated; its editorials still seem to think us young Irish people live under the oppressive regime of the condom-hating Catholic Church.

Plus, its features on drugs are hypocritical - on the one hand they argue for mature liberalisation of drug use (no problem there), but on the other hand they do so in a sensationalist approach that aims to shock the old folks. This is the entire writing philosophy of Olaf Tyaransen, it seems - and there was a recent cover story (in April, I think) about 'glass grass' which was tabloid hysteria masquerading as social concern. HP's discussions of sex-related issues also tries to (excuse the pun) have it both ways - aspiring for a moral position of frank, mature discussion but just resorting to boring, outdated titilation like the Anne Sexton columns. HP could be a valuable forum for discussing these issues - if it just wakes up to the fact that (for most of us) sex and drugs issues are no longer inherently shocking or taboo.

A point I've made here and on other boards is the similarity between Hot Press and 2FM. Both are of the same age, run by people who've been there since day one (at least the Catholic Church changes its leaders every so often, unlike Hot Press!) and seems desperately unfocussed and panicky about its role and identity. Both seem to overrely on 'celebrity' presenters/writers at the expense of content - 2FM's anachronistic dependence on Gerry Ryan, zoo radio like Colm and Jim-Jim and competitor-buying like its Phantom shopping spree a few years ago; HP's writers appear in its own social diary in the back pages. True, Today FM has name DJs too - but it always feels like they serve a station that has identified its audience (30-somethings in new homes, wearing Munster jerseys) and chases them relentlessly; it does this excellently and I'm sure the next listenership figures will reflect this.

I think both Hot Press and 2FM have huge potential and a valuable role to play in Irish media and cultural life - I'd love to see them strong and unmissable. They would complement the online community wonderfully (Una mentioned HP's restrictive website: another missed opportunity) - there's a healthy scene of music-related blogs and sites around these days. It's just that at the moment both HP and 2FM are drifting under outdated, out-of-touch leadership. Both can afford to take risks because they are established names with brand-loyalty that won't fold overnight. Basically, a new HP editor and new 2FM head - incoming people with no history at either place - is the answer.

Some really excellent stuff here, especially from Aidan and Una.

I was back in the UK a few weeks back and what did I do? I bought Hotpress on the back of the REM interview. I enjoyed it immensely. Andrea Corr was articulate and interesting. Niall Stokes didn't annoy me too much. Isn't Anne Sexton's column strangely unsexy? I think if I was an editor and I hired a woman to front a sex column, I'd hire someone who was more than just a raging nympho. Maybe it's because I just don't believe her?
But...but...but... the reviews section was just plain awful. Badly written, poor quality control and no feeling that there was a reviews editor onboard monitoring what was going onto the page. Cluas is different... we are self regulating. If someone produces a review, we can disagree there and then. Hotpress doesn't allow us that privilege.

I don't see it as a bad thing if a magazine has an editorial policy. Hotpress is kind to Irish acts - so what? Support is a good thing. I've seem some constructive criticism in there before.

Aidan's point that it needs freshening up from an editorial perspective is totally on the money.

Cluas is evolving whilst Hotpress is revolving.