The latter opines that:
“The main thing I’ve noticed since the rise of internet-only magazines and blogging is that the ‘journalism’ element has largely dropped out. By which I mean that it is quite rare you come across a reported story. There’s loads of high-powered, intellectual, vividly written writing about dance records, but you rarely get the sense that the writer is drawing on experiences of going to clubs or raves. You get a lot of pattern-recognition: writers competing to detect the emergence of a new subgenre. Or you get producers treated as auteurs, their work explicable in terms of intent and concept and technique. There’s surprising little sense that this is physical music, [whose] meaning and impact is determined by the dancefloor. It’s very cerebral, considering that it’s body music first and foremost."
This he attributed partly to the way that "Internet writing as a whole tends to become informationalized and ‘meta.’ You see this in writing about politics, there’s a lot of opinions and conjecture, articles about the ‘optics’ of political events, but very little reporting in online political journalism. The online outlets can’t afford to do that kind of reporting, but they are parasitic on it to some extent. So basically they are analyzing data flows, opinion patterns. And music journalism of all kinds, not just dance music journalism, is going the same way, for economic reasons it is dispensing with a reported, out-in-the-world dimension. Indeed most of the writing is criticism rather than journalism."