I was thinking that all this time, the UK press that I often read is not very favourable towards MK. They usually write a small piece that is so generic that could be describing any artist and release, and more often than I like to see, they have the axe on the table and just let you know indirectly, that they are too kind to be using it.
In Greece as well, the press people, are not very fond of MK. There is actually no music press in Greece anymore, at least not like Uncut, Mojo, etc. Everything went bust after 2010. But the journalists that survived and kept on writing on blogs, fanzines and newspaper music columns, are of a generation that consider MK and the likes, (Phil Collins, Eric Clapton, etc) too unfashionable because these journalists seem to think that punk, new wave, post rock and the currents that come from those music genres, are the genuine ones and every other musician that kept on doing the rock thing, is a dinosaur, but of the boring kind. Imagine that! For example Nirvana are already more than 35 years old and yet they consider them the high point of music of the last 50 years. If this isn't shortsightedness, I don't know what is.
I have written a couple of times to Uncut to complain about the way they handle the reviews when it comes to MK and DS, because i find insulting to see them award 9/10 to albums that are forgotten the very next day and influence nobody at all, let alone have minimum sales and even fewer fans, just because they have journalists that have this mentality to promote things just because they sound new, forgetting that they should also sound good. I am tired of trying these albums and being deeply disappointed by their lack of quality. I even wondered if there is no journalist in those magazines, that actually like MK, in order to give them the albums to review, instead of giving them to know it all snobs.
Sorry for the nagging.
