With the emergence of the internet, apps, Facebook, Twitter and whatever bit comes next, the critic is under attack. We are witnessing a radical overhaul of both the way reviewing is conducted, and the way reviewing is received.

In the past, a critic chosen for ability and expertise would see his or her standing grow according to their work. With time, a talented critic would become recognised as an authority, in part thanks to the backing of an
established media platform such as a newspaper or TV network. This is the David Stratton model, harking back to the “true judges” of David Hume. More recently, with new media platforms multiplying the number of voices,
anyone with an opinion can start disseminating it wildly and widely. if they cover the right ground and hit the right notes, they can become hugely popular, regardless of expertise or insight. This is the Perez Hilton model, harking back to a long list of under-informed hecklers.

Have Hume’s true judges, those unimpeachable arbiters of quality, been vanquished by an army of upstart arbiters? Or were the true judges a con all along? What are the pros and cons of the Stratton and Hilton models? Which model is more open to corruption and undue influence? Which is more likely to chime with consumers’ opinions? in short, what is the future of criticism?

Panel

Stephanie Bendixsen
Bernard Zuel
James Bradley
Sacha Molitorisz

Moderator

Sue Turnbull, Professor of Communication and Media, University of Wollongong

date: Tuesday 20 September, 2011
Time: 6 to 7.30pm
venue: Law School Foyer, Eastern avenue, the University of Sydney

FREE

Cost: This event is free and open to all. No ticket or booking required.

Archive