I've been asked to talk about this sort of thing next week, and I was wondering what you all thought about the way in which there is a lot of time, space and attention given to brand new acts, to the detriment of artists returning.

On DiS, I've quite purposely move away from a constant churn of new music, instead focussing on quality-first-and-foremost and cherry-picking a few new acts i.e. EMA became a focal point and was repeatedly mentioned on the boards and in the editorial of the site.

Without wanting to sound like a troll, do you for instance think that say, Friendly Fires' debut, garnered more mainstream TV and radio play than LCD Soundsystem Sound of Silver (which was out about the same time), because of riding on a sea of buzz or because they are in fact better?

Isn't it a bit weird that Ke$ha Jessie J was everywhere but Uffie was cast aside as being an artist from 3 years ago. Or the way Sleigh Bells debut seemed to get loads more coverage than Crystal Castles II. Or how Salem last year, and Cults and Odd Future this year have had way more attention than say These New Puritans (until year end lists hit), Bright Eyes or Saul Williams. Or do you think the second-wind that acts like The National, The Antlers and Grizzly Bear have been given, was down to the fact they made great(er) records and the media in some ways consolidated all the previous love, and gave the band the coverage they deserve.

OR... Is it because blogs are driving the agenda?
Or... is it just because new things are MORE EXCITING and dangle the carrot of being massive, rather than the reality of a band who have seemingly reached their peak?

I think I know what I think about all this but I'd be curious what you all think and any examples that have confused, frustrated or pleasantly surprised you... Here's what I was quoted as saying in Music Week http://seaninsound.tumblr.com/post/7260657872/on-this-subject-adams-said-it-felt-like-the

TL;DR? I guess my three main questions are:

1) What do you think about all of this, and should DiS be more like some magazines that cover 30+ bands you've never heard of per week (however, we do cover new music through our various columns, especially the local columns. We just don't do interviews with brand new bands, partly due to a lack of traffic but also because it makes quality control difficult) and radio stations which dedicate a helluva lot of air-time and resources to unsigned indie music, and not as much time to various genres of music (be it metal or dubstep or whatever).

2) Do you primarily listen to brand new bands, rather than established acts - and if so, why?

3) Do you think new bands get a disproportionate amount of media coverage/airplay/attention?

Feel free to answer any or all of these questions or call me on my bullshit examples above...