Music journalism has expanded in the digital age, because fans have had more opportunity than ever before to bring their opinions to the forefront alongside music journalists. In the article “How Music Criticism Lost Its Edge,” The New Yorker writer Kelefa Sanneh argued that music journalists are getting more polite, and overall less critical than they used to be. In the mid-2000s, a music movement called “poptimism” emerged, where people leaned more into understanding pop music’s artistic merit. As listeners observed that critics were not as accepting to genres other than rock, critics gradually became poptimists. “I think, because, music criticism has probably become a bit less authentic in recent years,” Berkeley High School junior Abigail Goldsmith said. With social media, fans have had more of a voice in the music criticism landscape.
Rolling Stone started as a print shop in Haight-Ashbury, San Francisco, in the 1960s. It focused more on underground music and was considered progressive. Eventually, in the 90s, it shifted to be more focused around popular music, entertainment content, and pop-culture. At the end of each year, Rolling Stone releases a list that compiles the best albums released that year. The list combines producer, artist, critic, and music industry opinion.
In the 1990s, Pitchfork was founded. The magazine got its start by covering lesser-known bands and generally still caters to more niche music. However, as it has been owned by mass-media company Condé Nast since 2015, it has expanded to covering more popular music. Their lists are made entirely by music journalists and critics.
Both Rolling Stone and Pitchfork released their best albums of 2025 lists in early December. The lists contain a lot of overlap, although there is much more of an emphasis on lesser-known bands in Pitchfork’s, as would be expected. Additionally, Rolling Stone’s list features popular artists such as Justin Bieber, Taylor Swift, and Sabrina Carpenter.
Maisy Matthews, a BHS senior, is a big fan of Nourished by Time, a band featured on the Pitchfork list. “It’s a little experimental,” she said. Matthews appreciates creative and unconventional music, so she generally prefers the Pitchfork list.
“I think (Pitchfork created) a solid list because they definitely rode the line between super popular and kind of a little niche. And I appreciate that because it’s gonna be really helpful for those who are just getting into independent or decently obscure music,” Matthews said. A former die-hard Swiftie herself, Matthews feels adamantly that Taylor Swift’s “The Life of a Showgirl” does not belong on the Rolling Stone list. “I think the album was just lyrically very bad, and it wasn’t anything special or new from her,” Matthews said.
Goldsmith is a big fan of Cameron Winter, whose album “Heavy Metal” is featured on the Pitchfork top albums list. “I went to see him live. It was really, really good,” she said. Goldsmith points out the difficulty with assigning a numerical rating to art, since it can sometimes dilute the many layers that go into understanding it. “The album can mean different things to different people, as well,” she said.
Zara Glynn, a BHS senior, is a big fan of Oklou, whose album “choke enough” is featured as number four on the Pitchfork list. “I really like that all the music creates an atmosphere, and it feels kind of ambient,” Glynn said on the album. Glynn pointed out that a lot of music discourse online is not necessarily directed at music alone. “A lot of the criticism I see of music and all art in general, it’s not really a criticism of the media. It’s more the criticism of the person creating it,” they said.
Glynn and Goldsmith both highlighted how great albums often have a story and an intentional, methodical order to them. “Pitchfork could definitely seem more based on audience opinions, whereas Rolling Stone is very much huge artists,” Goldsmith said.