Topic: Why does Rolling Stone suck so badly?

[goutroy]

I haven't read RS for many years, but I stopped reading for a few reasons. It's less about music and more about pop culture in general nowadays. It also seems like it's written by rock critics who were "cool" and "edgy" 25 years ago. Now, any "edge" they had as youthful writers has been glossed over and smoothed by years and years of writing the same article about every band they encounter. When I want music interviews and reviews, I read Skyscraper, Devil in the Woods, Under the Radar, or The Big Takeover.

[Otters Walk Among Us]

[quote][i]Originally posted by Grunch[/i]
<br>And how could I forget ICE - well, not conventionally a magazine, but an essential monthly chock full of stuff any music collector cannot afford to miss.
[/quote]

You probably forgot ICE because it died a few months ago. Very sad. It was essential for the new and vault release listings alone.

At Maison des Loutres, we get The Big Takeover, Mojo, and Magnet.

I was forced to buy concert tickets through icketmaster a couple years ago and received a free years subscription to RS for my troubles. In a way, it reminded me of what Top 40 radio used to be before radio splintered into tightly defined formats. They try to have a little something for everybody, but ultimately leave nobody satisfied.

I hadn't realized I hadn't posted since June 23.

[randy]

Otter Lives!!!!!!

[WolverineSyr]

I was wondering what was up with Otters...it's hard being the only weasel in town.

I got so frustrated with Rolling Stone about 10 years ago, that I've never picked up another copy.

Everyone's sentiments above are spot-on. I see it as an old hippie magazine, desperately trying to keep current and failing at every attempt. I hated the convoluted, dramatic writing and the ridiculous "teens gone wrong" stories.