Pitchfork is notorious for their brutal social commentary. BrooklynVegan on the other hand, is merely a display for hipster culture and updates for selected bands and events. If you have received a poor review or post from a Pitchfork reviewer, then they will consistently bash you for your poor music or live performance. This aspect is a rather unfortunate blemish on this site's reputation.
For instance, the latest album from the Black Kids "Partie Traumatic" received a hilariously insulting assault from Pitchfork. They had been praised for their first EP, but then their full length came out and was deemed terrible by Pitchfork. Also, if you're interested in comically negative feedback, then check out the review of Jet's latest album.
Though at times it seems like a committee of music snobs runs the site, they are in fact the epitome of hipster culture and pompous music criticism. It is impossible to ignore their acclaimed status on the criticism front, no matter how degrading their words may come out. Their reviews, for the most part, are in depth and analyze the artist's new work with loaded criteria. So, even if they offend you for not liking the latest Kings of Leon album, you must abide by the mighty pitchfork as a member of the hipster community.
So, if Pitchfork rated your life, what would they say? Would you clear the rarely seen 5.5? Maybe they would comment on your barely there middle aged hipster street credit. Perhaps they throw a few jabs at how you're still using "Time to Pretend" as your walking down Bedford Ave jam. They might commend you on your low income and mint condition Wayfarers. Either way, Pitchfork crushes many aspects of the hipster culture in order to build it back up and inspire new ridiculous trends to emerge.