You’re kidding yourself if you think the amount of money The Guardian makes off of Morrissey is anything north of negligible. This is about one thing and one thing only: Morrissey’s refusal to accept a potentially negative review. He’s like every other hypocritical “freedom of speech advocate.” He wants to be able to talk about whatever he wants without consequence, while no one should be allowed to talk about him beyond the pre-approved Fiona Dodwells.
You’re kidding yourself if you think the amount of money The Guardian makes off of Morrissey is anything north of negligible. This is about one thing and one thing only: Morrissey’s refusal to accept a potentially negative review.
It may be petulance or self preservation on his part but I think Morrissey gifted the Guardian (intentionally) this bit of publicity - hence their tweet. Nothing like an old fashioned feud to grab eye balls and pique interest - because aren't you a little bit more curious now to read the Guardian's review? And if there is no review, well, that's what Morrissey wanted. And if it's negative, that's sour grapes and evidence of the Guardian's "anti-moz" agenda; if its positive - well, that's positive. Worst, if it's just meh. So a win win for all involved!
Bit silly of his management - The Guardian has a decent amount of readers who won't get to hear about the album?
Print PAMCo Reach Adults 741,000 Daily
15-34 126,000 Daily
35+ 610,000 Daily
PC PAMCo Reach Adults 1,492,000 Daily
15-34 426,000 Daily
35+ 1,059,000 Daily
Mobile PAMCo Reach Adults 3,347,000 Daily
15-34 1,042,000 Daily
35+ 2,270,000 Daily
Multiplatform PAMCo Reach Adults 5,391,000 Daily
15-34 1,560,000 Daily
35+ 3,787,000 Daily
comScore uses TheGuardian.com
Last updated: 20/03/2019
Peter is part of the foundation of the Smiths/Moz fandom and this Site. For that alone, I won’t disrespect him.