Comment by wavemode

> It felt like the first 3 (or 2.5) paragraphs, which were arguing that Bjork needed an official website, were a bit of a tangent from the main argument of the article, which was that we need more professional critics, but social media has essentially defunded and dethroned them.

In what way is that a tangent? In both cases, the author argues that a centralized authoritative source of information is better than scattershot posts on social media.