Members TZR Posted February 5, 2007 Members Share Posted February 5, 2007 seems there are more celebrities than musicians on the cover these days... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Televator Posted February 5, 2007 Members Share Posted February 5, 2007 I don't even know where to start with this. Maybe it's the irritating / irrelevant cover "artists", many of whom have nothing to do with music, much less rock music, the whiney conspiracy theory-laced political articles, the film and music reviews (i.e., stylized opinions) which seem hopelessly out of sync with my preferences (and reality, for that matter), the ridiculous obsession with Bob Dylan, the over-abundance of advertisements, the petty celebrity watching, or the incessant self-congratulatory retrospectives, but I can hardly even stand to thumb through this festering pile of "hip". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Wilbo26 Posted February 5, 2007 Members Share Posted February 5, 2007 Total {censored}. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Phallic Potato Posted February 5, 2007 Members Share Posted February 5, 2007 I subscribed for a year about a decade ago. In one issue, an advertiser affixed a tiny pair of underwear to their ad. Now I tell people that I bought a tiny pair of underwear for $30 and got 12 issues of Rolling Stone for free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gil1 Posted February 5, 2007 Members Share Posted February 5, 2007 I haven't looked at it in a while, but because of this thread, I checked it out on line. The music articles in Rolling Stone never really interested me overall. Sometimes they have a really good one, which gets my interest and gives the mag a push. But overall it's kind of newspaper like, as if they are tired of doing music, and they get excited and do a good job when an interesting idea hits them. While I was at their website I noticed that they have a prominent article on Tibet. I think it's good to draw attention to Tibet, there's a real mess over there. I read a bit of the article, and it seemed pretty good, too. Overall, I'm glad they bring what attention they can to some topics (I've seen some on Global Warming, and I was glad they were putting some coverage on that). Some of their other political topics seem like filling space, sort of like their Music topics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members letterswewrote Posted February 5, 2007 Members Share Posted February 5, 2007 pitchforkmedia.com is a decent site. certainly pretentious as all get out but their tastes generally align with mine. if your bored and want to see something funny, do a search for their reviews of, i believe the second Jet album... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members CapnMarvel Posted February 5, 2007 Members Share Posted February 5, 2007 I subscribed for maybe 3 years back when I was a teenager. It was interesting for a 16 year old to hear about Mercury Rev or the Flaming Lips for the first time, but then about 1997 things changed for the horrible and I found myself hating reading it. Of course, their music taste has always been bad - I read through several dozen issues from the 70's, and they were in this laid-back El Lay singer-songwriter kick for damn near the entire decade. They scoffed at hard rock, ignored New York and Detroit, and generally fellated Dylan and Jackson Browne every other issue. Their articles and guest spots (Hunter Thompson!) made the magazine worth reading, but the old reviews are an abomination. My university library also had complete collections of Creem dating back to 1968....now THAT was a {censored}ing magazine! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.