Everybody has to start somewhere — independent music websites are the key to growing your audience. When I caught wind of a band degrading independent music sites, it made me wonder how many people see them as inferior to the likes of NME, a music publication that was founded in 1952.

After some, I guess you could say, “Twitter beef” appeared on my newsfeed I was driven on a trail that led me to listen to a particular episode of a podcast.

I don’t want to mention said podcast because it really has nothing to do with them but rather the guest they had on — whom I won’t mention either (I’m sure you can hazard a guess). Although, they did leave the comments in and they didn’t tell them their opinions were quite frankly pretty ignorant.

The host asked the band if they’d read a particularly non-flattering but honest review of their last album to which they responded by saying they “saw it and laughed”. Harmless, right? Well, what followed next was mind-blowing to me that a band constantly embroiled in some sort of drama would decide to say publicly. Sometimes — especially in situations like this — you should think before you word-vomit.

After being accused of assault at Leeds Festival (apparently, police reports were filed and they reportedly “started a fight backstage” — there have been no updates since 2016) to photoshopping their names higher on a festival line-up because, in the frontman’s own words, “they shouldn’t be above us, should they, surely?”.

It really doesn’t take a genius to work out that a band with 84.3k monthly Spotify listeners and 38k Instagram followers versus a band with 412.6K monthly listeners and 44k followers would appear after the latter on a line-up. It seems a bit petty, no? Although they had “no issues with the band” in question, it seems peculiar to me that they deemed it necessary to Photoshop themselves one whole row (yep) above. What is there to gain from that? Apart from, of course, a big chunk of people thinking you’re self-assured idiots.

Not to mention that the lead singer once said “I think we could be the pioneers of guitar music when this album drops” to NME back in 2017. I can confirm that didn’t happen — unless I’m missing something.

For a band that became “relevant” due to constant sprees of following and unfollowing on Twitter (I was one of them), you’d think they would understand getting reviews from the likes of NME or The Guardian doesn’t just happen overnight. Even if you’re a well-established band; smaller blogs reviewing your music still opens you up to more listeners — so surely that’s a good thing, right?

In the podcast, when the host mentions the “scathing” review where said reviewer thought there “wasn’t much development from the first album” — which, in my opinion, is an honest and clearly non-biased opinion that the band should’ve taken on board to help with their third one — the frontman says that, “I don’t think you could take it too serious anyway because you’re not gonna read it” (spoiler: they quite clearly read it).

He goes on to say it’s not a “credible source” — bearing in mind the host literally runs the music website that posted the review — and that the “chances are, whoever’s wrote it is probably not in a band”.

First of all, I wasn’t aware that you had to be in a band to review music. How bizarre is that? Sorry music journalists, if you’re not in a band your opinion doesn’t count! Time to audition for The Wiggles… or would you prefer S Club 7?

As if the knife wasn’t in deep enough, he adds, “I’m just thinking, ‘can they even play an instrument for a start?’” Yes, now all music journalists must pick up an instrument or their opinions are redundant.

According to the frontman, the review was “a bit daft” but “everyone’s entitled to their own opinion no matter what but if it comes across as bad that looks bad for you because it’s not a credible thing”. By ‘credible thing’ I can only assume he’s referring to major publications. I’m sure if many music journalists could go straight from small independent blog to hugely well-known music site then they most likely would.

But, would a review with negative connotations, say from the likes of trusted music site Pitchfork, have the same effect on them? Surely, if a website is widely known then they’d “respect” their opinion and not seek grievances because somebody set any bias aside and was as honest as possible?

I get it. You’re a band who think they’re the ‘20s answer to Oasis (that no one asked for) and at one sign of criticism from a website you haven’t seen pop up on the ‘News’ app, you take it to heart. God forbid, somebody just didn’t think your body of work was to their taste and wanted to articulate that in an honest way.

I wish I could say he stopped there, but one of my favourite lines has to be, “we don’t take any notice anyway” — evidently — “because it was a top 20 album”. The jokes write themselves.

By no means do I have a vendetta against this band, I’m only trying to formulate some kind of discussion surrounding many bands blatant disregard for smaller, independently run music sites.

I’ve seen this band live three times (accidentally) and met them (I’d insert the photo here but I was sixteen and it’s not happening) — hell, writing this has reminded me I’m even friends with one of them on Facebook, and I still have a pending request from an ex-member’s brother. I have no issues with them at all, but I can’t sit idly by and watch them belittle independent sites.

For a band that were doing quite well for themselves around four years ago, it’s excruciatingly disheartening to see them take such a meteoric fall from grace yet somehow manage to cling onto festival spots they definitely don’t deserve. No offence, there’s just a fair few other bands I could Photoshop in their place.

The genre of “Fifa bands” or “lad bands” are still thriving because they produce easily digestible drivel and that’s what most Ian Brown or Courteeners fans wielding bucket hats and God’s worst creation (Strongbow Dark Fruits) enjoy. Yes, I’m blaming God for that one.

Festivals will keep booking these ready salted bands full of bland white men who all sound the same because the quality of the music doesn’t matter if you can’t see straight. And people lap it up. Why? That’s for another time, and something I’ll possibly never understand.