But i think I've figured it out. Unfortunately it'll be a long-winded explanation. I apologize I advance for the wall of text.
So...
I disagreed with the Reviewer's assertion that My Miami wasn't montage-worthy.
Here's how I saw it:
My main references for "Miami shows" are Burn Notice and CSI Miami. I've watched a lot of both. As the listing talks about the dark side of the city, crime, gangs, drugs, etc. I can reasonably assume that CSI and BURN Notice would at the very least, be consistent with the listing's show. CSI and BN both have Miami montages in many episodes. Wait, no, in EVERY episode. Several montages actually.
But there's two distinct kinds of "montages" in these shows;
Montage type 1 - has a "vocal song" that is played to provide emotional impact to what the characters are going through, which is more of the Bob Seeger, U2 thing. The vocal is forefront. (The Bruckheimer approach). These montages rely on the "popness" of the piece to provide the emotional context either with new twist by juxtaposing an old known hit, or add some hipness by having a new "undiscovered" gem of a tune. (Think 'All around us are familiar faces, worn-out places, worn out face-e-e-es....) Once again, vocal songs. And usually at the end of the show, while the video dissolves and pans to all the characters, some crying, some sitting contemplatively with their kids, one might be a junkie shooting up, a baby being born, etc... These montages generally run the full length of the song.
Montage type 2 - The other type of montage is focused only on providing an atmosphere of "bustling Miami" with shots of boardwalks, beaches. bikinis, oiled musclemen, cars cruising the strip, etc. These montages usually happen at the beginnings (credits) of shows to set up the vibe and between scenes as the characters travel from one destination to the other to investigate a crime or when transitioning between tow sub-plots. These montages very often use music that does not have the vocal up front. These pieces, in my experience, tend to be groove-oriented and maybe have a chant-vocal or rap kinda thing going. (some can be instrumental) These montages basically remind the viewer that they're watching a sexy show about a sexy town. And they very often sound like some kind of cool Latin rap/hip-hop song that's local to the region. You know, "legit." But I also hear alot of clearly "guy in his studio playing a groove and sending it through TAXI." This kind of piece is far enough from the "legit" pieces that it doesn't sound fakey and stupid to folks from Miami, but cool enough so that Miamians might spin it.
So, within the above context, I perceived "My Miami" as fitting squarely into the Type 2 category. Seemed pretty simple.
Then, it occurred to me that the problem might be a fundamental misunderstanding of the word "Montage":
The word "Montage", to the Reviewer, may mean ONLY Type 1 montages.
The Reviewer ( and sup) may consider Type 2 Montages as "cut scene music" or "transition" music, and within the workflow of the client, Type 2 stuff may all be done in-house, in which case they're only looking to TAXI to provide Type 1 music.
If the above is true, then I would side with the reviewer. I probably wouldn't forward "My Miami" for a type 1 Montage because as sexy as the song is, the vocal/story isn't foreground enough for type 1.
But the reviewer would have no idea that the Artist doesn't make this delineation.
And the Artist may have no idea that there's a even a delineation there to begin with.
So the Artist walks away frustrated because they benevolently came up with something that pretty much "nailed it" (at least to a forward-able degree)...
While the Reviewer walks away satisfied because they successfully completed the review and, within their own understood context, provide articulate feedback.
Meanwhile, some of us on this post are confused. In the absence of clarity, we're coming up with all kinds of reasons why/ why not it wasn't forwarded. And as we read and absorb each others conjecture, we become the Human Centipede of our own BS, essentially.
(which I hope I'm not doing right now be typing this 
)So is anyone to blame for this unfortunate circumstance?
-Well, as Artists on TAXI, if we intend to work in TV/Film, it's our responsibility to learn the standardized terminology for the industry. If "montage" within the industry ONLY refers to what I called Type 1 within the industry, it's ultimately our job to know that. We have to accept that and learn the industry-standard terminology we you intend to work in the industry.
-Can I blame the Reviewer for not schooling the Artist on the difference between Type 1 and Type 2?
Nope. The Reviewer has no idea of what each artist's context is. And it is wholly unreasonable to expect a Reviewer to know what each and every TAXI Artist does and doesn't know. Especially within the context of a submission, so, no.
Now, if the reviewer's delineation between Montage and cut scene ISN"T based on industry-standard terminology, then they DO bear the burden of resonsibility because, JUST LIKE THE ARTISTS, the reviewers are responsible for using industry-standard terminology. So IF the reviewer doesn't understand this industry term, and "Montage", in fact CAN mean both types listed above, then the reviewer has done a disservice to both the client and the Artist because Reviewer caused a missed opportunity for both parties, as well as for TAXI. But I'm not saying that this is the case, as I suspect that the Reviewer IS using standard terminology in some form.
-Is there something wrong with the submission process itself? Is there some kind of failsafe for this? I don't think so. Currently, the process is simple.
Right now it's "here's my song, let me know." It's gotta be that straight up.
I can't be "Here's my song, and here's why I think it is on target so if I've missed the point, write me a detailed description (a la this post, haha) of what I don't know." Ugh, nobody would ever get forwarded because the TAXI staff hands would fall off.
So is there a solution?
Yep. A glossary of terms that is based on Industry-standard terminology that we ALL adhere to consistently and is readily available on the website.
Is there one? If not, I volunteer to drive it.
In closing, I'd just like to say that it looks like the Artist and Reviewer in this situation both did exactly the right thing, given their contexts. I commend them both for taking care of bidness. If my assertions are correct, the process worked. But like they used to say in the 70's "Hey, misunderstanding happens." (or something like that
). It's frustrating, but I don't think the frustration could have been averted. Nobody knows what they don't know. Ultimately, the real frustration that we all bear in this situation is lost opportunity. Think about it, Op's got serious GAME. If OP had put his efforts into the right target I have no doubt that he could have knock it out of the park.
As it is,he wrote a great piece of music that may end up in a TV show yet. I know I wouldn't mind having "My Miami" in my back pocket for future use.
Well done.
Bill
(but i hope it was at least funny) 
