Pitchfork is crap. That being said so is the the prevailing mentality on this site that the more accessible or hook driven a band is the better they are.
Errr really?? The whole mentality amongst rock, punk and indie websites seem to be the complete opposite - any form of pop is bad. That is why there are so few guitar-based bands who have actually managed to break - because any band that does seem to have catchy choruses and 'all-encompassing' lyrics gets shunned because they either copied someone from the 60s, 70s or 80s (So fucking what it was 20 odd years ago!!) or because they are on the radio and therefore don't have 'any real meaning'. Just take a look at Pitchfork, NME or Drowned In Sound or even the Mercury Award nominations today. AbsolutePunk is nowhere near as bad as those sites - it champions rock that is good pop - but when it comes to rock and indie it seems to be the same across the board: 'alternative rock is good, clever, real, meaningful, deep; classic/pop/mainstream rock is bad, stale, childish and shallow'
Also calling band on a major label who did a record with a mainstream pop producer "indie" shows how dumb using the term indie as a genre is.
The term 'indie' has changed it's meaning. It no longer has the same meaning now than it did in the 80s. Kaiser Chiefs and The Cribs are 'indie rock' bands no matter what label they are on. Same with the words 'emo' and even 'post-hardcore' - they have taken on a new broader meaning. Just like many words have changed there meaning over the decades and even centuries.