Accountability
Editors Letters || Friday, 13 January, 2006
I take your point, but surely writing a very negative review of someone's work won't do their career much good either?!? I just feel that it would enhance the reviews and make them more considered and balanced if they were not anonymous. Surely you shouldn't write something under a pen name that you are not prepared to back up in person?
I'm not a dance maker so don't have a personal axe to grind in this, but I am a journalist and do feel quite strongly about owning your opinions, and being prepared to discuss your work with those that you write about. Surely taking on board other people's views of their work is something that the people that you write about do on a daily basis - surely they don't undertake personal vendettas against everyone who comments on their work?
Suzie Bell
Since, at present, there are only two reviews on Article19, the reviews section is brand new and the other review is located in features, then I presume you are referring to the review of Dance4. At present I am not aware of an other review on this particular programme (nor or we likely to see any) so we have nothing else to compare it too at present.
It is our view, at Article19, that the state of dance film making is in such dire shape that only by expressing what we truly think of such a programme can we even begin to motivate people to make better films, in our opinion of course.
To say anything else would simply be untrue from our point of view and most dance makers we have spoken to, who have seen the programme, agree, it was very, very poor.
Those featured in reviews or anyone else are free to leave comments or communicate with Article19 and they will always receive a response. We feel not knowing the reviewers name in no ways hinders that type of communication.
Stumble It!
