are you fucking kidding me man? You're saying to blame the voice for this? The guy didn't tell them it was fiction, the burden is all on him.

It's called journalistic intergrity, the guy deserves to be ruined.

welcome to the era of james frey. I find it astonishing that people are burning writers at the stake when our elected government is full of liars and criminals. ridiculous!

welcome to the era of james frey. I find it astonishing that people are burning writers at the stake when our elected government is full of liars and criminals. ridiculous!

this whole Voice thing is irrelevant. he should have been unemployed after that bullshit at PLUG.

of course I believe in journalistic integrity (just updated the quickly written post to say so too).

I guess what I'm saying is it just seems so obvious that Nick makes stuff up, and saying you were with people when you weren't is SO FAKE that it just has to be fiction - and that his bosses at the Voice should of known that more than anybody.

I really see no need to ever look at the Voice again. This kind of cover story tripe (whether true or not) is indicative of new ownership (New Times media). The listings can be helpful, but they can be found elsewhere. Craigslist has usurped the RE and job listings. Musto had his day, Shelter was interesting when it first appeared, the cartoons can be found elsewhere, and Christgau and his cronies ought to retire. It was once a mighty rag, now it's only a rag. RIP.

just for the record, I slightly updated the text again just now.

"I blame them, not him."

This is pretty ridiculous. Under no circumstances is MAKING SHIT UP the fault of anyone but the writer. The fact that he has a track record of making shit up doesn't give him a pass either.

c, that's actually one of the lines I updated. I changed it to "I blame them more than him".

stop defending nick sylvester. nothing goods come from his soul.

You blame the Village Voice more than the talentless hack who wrote the article?

This is what happens when bloggers assert their opinions on matters more weighty than tour dates. Poor.

but come on guys. the world can forgive people if they are nice to look at.

I just have to say that while I disagree with the remark two comments up, it was brilliant.

i'm with carla. i can't believe this has received as much attention as it has. so a guy made up a paragraph in an article about a book instructing guys on how to get laid, big deal...damage done = not too much. deficit spending for the war in iraq = 244 billion, which means when we pay it back (if we ever do,) we'll be hated worldwide and poor, as well as being liars.

Look, it ain't complicated. If you're a journalist, don't make shit up. If you do, or you want to take literary license and blur the lines between fiction and nonfiction, then say so up front, tell your editors and tell your readers. End of story. The Voice is a very real journalism outlet (just read Wayne Barrett's stuff some time, if you want proof), and it is never going to take lightly something like this. Nor should it. That said, sounds like they need a few more fact checkers over there....

Oh, and whoever posted above about letting James Frey off the hook because we have liars in government...er, what?

Look, 9/11 was just "Osama being Osama". We can't blame him personally; we all knew what kind of person he is. We should probably blame Allah for not keeping Bin Laden on a tighter leash. Allah is SO CLEARLY OMNIPOTENT that He should have known better than anybody.

i don't like Nick's writing and I don't like Pitchfork, but to be completely fair, it seems that PFM would fire Nick. He doesn't write news their or anything that deals with facts. He writes reviews. His failure to be a real journalist has little if anything to do with his critical opinions.

Plus, all roads to the fact that Sylvester will NOT be fired at the voice. The editors encouraged his meta narratives and seem to be in his corner.

In the event that he isn't fired, just suspended, isn't pitchfork going to look like they jumped the gun and rather silly?

Shouldn't they have waited for a review of the piece and the outcome before they fired him?

The king of the idiotic metaphors has arrived! All bow in subservience!

So, because there are bad people in our government and other bad things going on in the world, we should drop our standards for everyone else and just let it slide? That makes a lot of sense. By that argument, no one should care what anyone does outside of politics and world events. Basically, you could dismiss anyone's bad behavior, ethical lapses, etc. by saying, "Hey, why should we care about this, there's a war going on." There's always something bad happening in the world. There's always lies and deceit in government. That doesn't mean we should forget our own ethical codes, our own beliefs. Sorry, I take journalism seriously, yes, even really silly Voice cover stories. Truth and honesty are important in this world, whatever you're doing, whatever you're writing about. How could you argue otherwise?

honestly, i don't see why people care so much. the story was about picking girls up. that was the premise of the story, which wouldn't guess should be news worthy. maybe instead of spending so much time debating this news story, people should write about how new media (the new voice owners) forced the anti-bush blog "the daily bush" off of the website.

The king of the idiotic metaphors has arrived! All bow in subservience!

So, because there are bad people in our government and other bad things going on in the world, we should drop our standards for everyone else and just let it slide? That makes a lot of sense. By that argument, no one should care what anyone does outside of politics and world events. Basically, you could dismiss anyone's bad behavior, ethical lapses, etc. by saying, "Hey, why should we care about this, there's a war going on." There's always something bad happening in the world. There's always lies and deceit in government. That doesn't mean we should forget our own ethical codes, our own beliefs. Sorry, I take journalism seriously, yes, even really silly Voice cover stories. Truth and honesty are important in this world, whatever you're doing, whatever you're writing about. How could you argue otherwise?

So, because there are bad people in our government and other bad things going on in the world, we should drop our standards for everyone else and just let it slide? That makes a lot of sense. By that argument, no one should care what anyone does outside of politics and world events. Basically, you could dismiss anyone's bad behavior, ethical lapses, etc. by saying, "Hey, why should we care about this, there's a war going on." There's always something bad happening in the world. There's always lies and deceit in government. That doesn't mean we should forget our own ethical codes, our own beliefs. Sorry, I take journalism seriously, yes, even really silly Voice cover stories. Truth and honesty are important in this world, whatever you're doing, whatever you're writing about. How could you argue otherwise?

So, because there are bad people in our government and other bad things going on in the world, we should drop our standards for everyone else and just let it slide? That makes a lot of sense. By that argument, no one should care what anyone does outside of politics and world events. Basically, you could dismiss anyone's bad behavior, ethical lapses, etc. by saying, "Hey, why should we care about this, there's a war going on." There's always something bad happening in the world. There's always lies and deceit in government. That doesn't mean we should forget our own ethical codes, our own beliefs. Sorry, I take journalism seriously, yes, even really silly Voice cover stories. Truth and honesty are important in this world, whatever you're doing, whatever you're writing about. How could you argue otherwise?

all right. enough with the "we should be paying more attention to something else" arguement. It's just fucking dumb.

I agree though that the Voice is apparently to blame somewhat since they seemingly encouraged Sylvester to be doing this kind of writing......but still, it was all Sylvester

while it is true that the voice is NOT what it was 'back in the day' (i'm 45 and i don't EVER remember seeing all these right-wing, out of state letter writers), this fiasco falls squarely and solely on the WRITER.

PLEASE don't say something like the voice "should've known," bv. the writer should have been forthright and open about his piece.

and carla is simply mixing apples and oranges. deceitful writers SHOULD be called on the carpet. and those 'elected officials' should be burned at the stake. but neither have anything to do with each other.

i disagree w/drewo on one point, however. MUSTO is still MUSTO. and 'savage love' is more than worth the effort of leafing through the issue each week.

good point anonymous, but it wasn't Osama who flew an airplane into a building; it was the person who worked for him.

pitchfork is stupid to drop sylvester over this

I agree with Matt. I actually don't see how you can even draw a correlation between what Sylvester did and the war in Iraq, the Bush Administration, or anything political. They're two completely different things. And like Matt, I also care a lot about journalism so these sorts of indiscretions are a big deal to me.

I neither love nor hate Nick Sylvester's writing, but I don't see how the Voice retains him regardless of the fact that it was a lame story on a lame topic and and was not anything Blair-like in its scope. His credibility as a writer is shot and more power to Pitchfork for taking the initiative to respond. Regardless of your opinions on Pitchfork, it is a hugely influential web site with a huge readership and it should be concerned about protecting its own interests when it comes to who writes for them.

sure, this piece is emblematic of sylvester's style to a point. however, the other non-music pieces he has penned for the voice are generally so over the top and full of quotes from (here's the key) fictional people that they can't be taken seriously. in this instance he attributed false words and a false place to a REAL person. that's called lying, and that cannot be allowed to stand at a newspaper. he is not a journalist. if the voice is so in love with him, they should never have allowed him to cross that line from humor/thought piece to hard reportage (even if the subject was ridiculously trite in this case). this is not the voice's fault. they either assumed the people misquoted were either fake or THEY HAD ACTUALLY SAID WHAT WAS IN QUOTES.

Regarding The Playlist's statements, any journalistic writing, including criticism, is based in facts to some extent. There's more leeway, but critics shouldn't fabricate facts or sources if the publication wants any sort of credibility. P-fork was wise to let him go, and Sylvester is ultimately screwed.

Blame everybody! Especially Johannes Gutenberg, inventor of the printing press; without him, this entire fiasco never could have happened.

Fuck personal responsibility- we need to blame our handlers. It's not like a guy with a degree from Harvard should know any better.

this hipster douchebag is done. stick a Fork in him.

i blame the readers.

i blame the bloggers

I heard Jason Blair is looking for a job, maybe they can start their own website and in the spirit of the Daily show's "fake news" they can write fake musical reviews. " I was at the YYY show at the Bowery the crowd was the great the band was so on, they played all their old material and the crowd loved it! "

i blame you

yeah, i blame myself, too. sorry about all this trouble i caused everybody.

By the way, Matt apologizes for posting the same comment four times. Seems BV got a little overwhelmed there with the number of posters....

now that we all admitted our wrong doing, lets move on

F this guy.

I just find it weird that pfork drops Nick over this, but not Brent DiCrescenzo when he made up pretty much EVERYTHING in his original review of the Beastie Boys' To the 5 Boroughs...

While I did like his writing, I'm not gonna defend this guy now when there's many other writers that would have loved to have the position he had (at P4K and VV), and would not have lied to get there and then lie once they got there. It's an insult. He deserves everything he gets.

I have to admit now that I'm not who I say I am, I'm a 40-year old woman from Honduras who's super into Fall Out Boy and My Chemical Romance.

Don't worry about Bitchfork, they'll find some other 23-year old lackey with 9 credits of Creative Writing classes who talks out of their ass.

I really feel like Sylvester got screwed on the Pitchfork side of this story. I can understand if he got fired from The Voice, but Pitchfork has basically nothing to do with it. Were they that offended over it?

i agree with nick (above). i dont think pitchfork should have let him go. i really enjoy sylvester's reviews, there is a place for acerbic writing when done well.

but most importantly, since when does pitchfork care about things being factual?

What is at issue here is libel. We can tell from Nick's apology letter there was some form of distress based on something Nick made up (even if he didn't make up the quotes, he made up the situation, without proper disclosure, the difference is inconsequential). This isn't Jerry Falwell having sex in an outhouse with his mother; this is VERY believable to the average reader. The test of libel is not "oh, people who know Nick that knows he does this kind of thing," it's what a reasonable, average person would believe.

Basicly, both Nick and the Voice broke the law. Nick should be happy he is not currently looking for a lawyer (who knows? maybe he is). The Voice should be happy they are still in business.

I'm not neccesarily unsympathetic, FYI...I'm just trying to be realistic.

Nick Sylvester is through -- and the only one who will suffer because of this is Nick Sylvester.

You want to write fiction, write fiction -- don't pull bullsh*t and turn in a factual cover story to the Village Voice with fabrications to sex up your story or paper over your lack of interest/lack of drive/laziness.

Again, Nick Sylvester is through. There are more than enough hungry writers (including a few from Harvard) who will gladly snap up theo opportunities Nick has thrown away. Based on his noodling in the Voice and on Pitchfor, he is eminently replaceable.

-Z

I am very disappointed with your thoughts on this matter. As you know I am a big fan of your site and I respect what you do and your opinion, but I think you are way off on this. I doubt you would feel the same way if someone you didn't know had used "fiction" in a piece of journalism for an anti-vegan story. I read Nick's story and took it as fact (which is how it was presented BY HIM). Mr. Sylvester lied and I would fire him on the spot. It doesn't matter if he likes Arcade Fire or if likes President Bush. Standards are standards and he has none.

Who cares about any of this stuff? Pitchfork & VV have long been overrated. Not to mention they are both free...nobody got hosed out of their money...you get what you pay for. Move on.

I had to stop reading P'fork about a year or so ago, because it just got to be too cute. And utterly annoying to read, ultimately. Nick was part of the problem for me, I guess.

As for this Voice thing...maybe you're defending a friend...I don't know...but to assume that the reader knows you are LYING is ludicrous. He got caught...that's that.

wait. so it's all about money, mr knipfel? the truth costs money but lies we get for free. this world gets more depressing each day. and how do you really feel about the 'new york press, new york's premier alternative newspaper'? that's free. and please don't tell me that you pulled a james frey on us in your book 'slack jaw.' please don't.

Pitchfork fired Sylvester because he created negative publicity for them, period. They're within their right to do that. Just because you don't consider Pitchfork to be a serious business doesn't mean they don't; Schreiber makes well over six figures from that site. While I personally don't understand why Brent D. wasn't fired way back when, it's Schreiber's decision and no one else's- it's his business to run. I applaud Pitchfork's decision to have the balls to fire this douchebag, and I think the Voice's failure to do the same speaks volumes about it as well.

employed or not, i'd still do him

they fired our factchecking department three weeks ago.

It's a bigger deal that the story idea was stolen from a January Voice pitch by blogger Dolly of http://www.cocksanddolls.blogspot.com/, who was actually quoted in Nick's piece, and that her interesting angle--that very few women are able to spot a Pick Up Artist in action--was twisted in the phoney piece to suggest that most of them can.

It's a bigger deal that the story was stolen from a pitch by blogger Dolly of http://www.cocksanddolls.blogspot.com/ and that an actual woman's experience with Pick Up Artists was turned 180 degress for the faked article.

James Frey is not an asshole, and thus I side with him.

If Nick Sylvester didn't go out of his way to be an asshole in almost everything he writes, then I'd be on his side, but its too bad that he is.

Just because something did not happen does not mean it cannot strike a chord of truth. I haven't read the articles in question, so I don't know, but whatever. He chooses to act like an asshole, so he gets treated like one.