Jump to content

Drum Corps in TIME Mag Online


Recommended Posts

I think you can argue for a different top 10, but hey, they never call it marching bands, get all of the instruments right, and even throw in some old timers. Pretty cool!

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages...1914707,00.html

Huh? They call them bands all the time in the writeups. The link to the article is called "Battle of the Bands". I really don't mind though. I'll sell out that bit of integrity for national exposure to the activity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Huh? They call them bands all the time in the writeups. The link to the article is called "Battle of the Bands". I really don't mind though. I'll sell out that bit of integrity for national exposure to the activity.

right. Good exposure no matter what words they used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the glaring omission of '89 SCV, I'm tempted to write this off as the clumsy attempt at a Time n00b to act like he/she knows something about drum corps. But I'm just kind of happy to see drum corps get some MSM treatment at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hahaha always a solid source...

And I, for one, am not trying to whine about it.. I think the coverage is awesome, I'm just laughing at the choices a little. Besides, DCP complains about everything, don't we all know this? :laughing:

are you complaining on DCP that we are complaining on DCP?

:lol:

Shouldn't this topic be closed?

hahaha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I was out for a run I got to thinking about this article and how reporters are never very good with the details. This report for example calls them bands, and refers to the Phantom DM as a member of the guard. Sure, it's understandable since this is a pretty low key article and a very niche activity. However, I notice the same thing in reports about my profession. I work in the food manufacturing industry, and it's almost scary how often reporters for major news outlets mess up the details. I'm not talking about bias here, but facts that should - with minimal research - be easy to discern... like which agencies are responsible for different kinds of products (USDA = meat, FDA = everything else). It really makes me skeptical when I read articles about things I am not intimately familiar with. Can I really trust what they are saying as correct? I understand they are human and prone to mistakes, but it seems like people have a very high image of reporters (at least for outlets like the NYT, WSJ, TIME, etc) that isn't necessarily warranted.

Sorry for the diversion. Back to complaining about complaining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like everyone else here, I am pleased at positive, mainstream media coverage, regardless of how it was constructed. Of course, this being DCP, I've got a slight little complaint as well. How can you have a top ten of drum corps with not even a single mention of Star of Indiana?? :laughing:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I was out for a run I got to thinking about this article and how reporters are never very good with the details. This report for example calls them bands, and refers to the Phantom DM as a member of the guard. Sure, it's understandable since this is a pretty low key article and a very niche activity. However, I notice the same thing in reports about my profession. I work in the food manufacturing industry, and it's almost scary how often reporters for major news outlets mess up the details. I'm not talking about bias here, but facts that should - with minimal research - be easy to discern... like which agencies are responsible for different kinds of products (USDA = meat, FDA = everything else). It really makes me skeptical when I read articles about things I am not intimately familiar with. Can I really trust what they are saying as correct? I understand they are human and prone to mistakes, but it seems like people have a very high image of reporters (at least for outlets like the NYT, WSJ, TIME, etc) that isn't necessarily warranted.

Sorry for the diversion. Back to complaining about complaining.

You make a great point, though. It's the difference between good reporting and bad reporting. Back in 1982, the Chicago Tribune did a feature-length piece on drum corps and DCI that was well-written and factually exact, which means that it was either well-sourced, well-researched, or both. Nowadays, niche stories like this are very poorly researched. I bet if a guy did a puff piece like this on barbershop quartet the barbershop guys would pick it apart, and right they should. God knows what we're not being told in the important stuff, given the level of hackitude and greed that exists in the Village these days. Just further evidence of how lazy the supposed "main stream media" has become.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool to see, but wow, not even close to a Top 10 list. I only saw 3 or 4 that would be on there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...