Why does Pitchfork try to put meaning behind guys like Thugger and Future? It's not like they're saying anything much, that doesn't mean that the music suffers, however. They always ramble about how Future is in so much pain, yadda yadda, when it's more than likely not true, but that doesn't mean that you can't still enjoy the music.
they've got to at least try to justify their mindless pandering and trend-hopping with shit that makes them sound like they're the intellectual and well-informed musical journalism site that they're apparently supposed to be
so they invent meaning where there is none
White people are uncapable of admitting they listen something because it's fun; for them, every shit must have a huge intellectual and artistic background so they don't feel guit about enjoying them brainless negro rhythms.
Little do they know their attempt to interpret and assign meaning to rap music by means of the western, text-centered discourse of postmodern criticism is itself analogous to colonization.
>mfw I saw people calling Young Thug the David Bowie or the Kate Bush of hip hop earlier today on here
This, but it's irrelevant whether the music is "brainless negro rhythms" it's more about the cognitive dissonance and noble savage racism.
Also huge marketing budgets paying for positive reviews and features especially in the last few years and it'll move moreso into the realm of pop with the Conde Aquisition.
On top of that the only way P4K makes money is through clicks, they live off advertisting, so they need to capture some kind of progressive zeitgeist; hence the incredibly basic identity politics and critical theory articles et al, they garner attention from lots of demographics with their controversy.