However, connecting artists to their potential listeners is often a flawed process. Before a listener picks up an album by a band they've never heard of—or even the newest release from a band they've liked in the past—he or she may do some research, looking around online for what others have said about it. The writers of these reviews, who may or may not share the same taste in music as the potential listener, add additional layers between artist and audience, and their opinions color any perception the listener might have of the album should he or she decide to buy it. The reviewers act as filters, or even distortions, channeling the most subjective experience of all, the appreciation of art, through ears attached to someone else's head. If those ears don't like what they heard, the review will be unfavorable, and albums that a listener might fall in love with never reach them, cut off in the process.
This is not meant to demonize album reviewers, whose job we respect, appreciate, and have relied on in the past for countless recommendations. Our goal, however, is different from theirs. Instead of relying on third-party opinions to recommend albums, Globecat lets the artists speak for themselves.
In the spirit of keeping the connection between musician and audience as unfiltered as possible, Globecat publishes interviews, questionnaires (in the form of the Aleatory) and exposés written by artists, for listeners, so that nothing is left out or lost in the translation that takes place during the album review process. By letting the artists speak about their own work, the goals behind it, the heartbreaks, struggles, triumphs, and celebrations inherent in its creation and distribution to audiences around the world, the channel is kept clean, and the connection between musician and audience remains strong. Our job is mainly editorial, not editorializing; the words belong to the artists. Globecat is merely the place they are all gathered together for everyone to read.