I really did mean to do an update today, but I had an eye doctor appointment in the afternoon and my eyes are still messed up. My pupils are so dilated I could birth some sort of eye baby through them with no fuss and even less muss.
In lieu of anything new, here's a really old review I wrote of Rolling Stone magazine that is rife with spelling errors, punctuation problems, and other foul grammar. I think I wrote it when I was 16, and that helps explain why my opinions are idiotic and the points I try to make are ham fisted and even more idiotic. Idioticer. Uh huh.
"You know, I find it oh so ironic how trendy and pathetic Rolling Stone. I remember when I respected the magazine because they were just so popular that there had to be something good about it.
Well, there was 30 years ago. Flip to any random page and you are guaranteed to see an advertisement of some kind. Sure, the magazine looks huge when you see it on the shelf, but really 1/2 or less of the pages are actual content and not ultra trendy Gap or Tommy Hilfiger ads for the hipster 14 and under set. Isn't it ironic that a magazine that was created during the time of non-conformity and a hatred of all sponsors and big companies is now full of ads depicting these same things?
Perhaps the biggest problem I have with Rolling Stone is that they employ the worst possible people for jobs and let their amateurish opinions be known. I read an article on Rolling Stone online today, which was contributed by someone off of AOL. Being a former user of that service, I know how pathetic and xenophobic such people can be. But the aforementioned article, an attack of juvenile quality on Radiohead and their new album Kid A, was just too much. It was like CNN hired some random 14 year old to talk about how lame and stupid presidential candidate George Bush is. I do realize the article was mainly for comedy purposes, and most of Rolling Stone is a farce of one thing or another; but don't you think they could have got somebody more professional to do the jokes? Then it wouldn't seem like the personal attack that it was.
Any magazine that tries to cover all forms on entertainment will ultimately fail; because no one person or magazine can satisfy every group unless it is around 300 pages long....oh, and with half the pages *not* filled with advertisements. As it is, you have no excuse to but this magazine at all, because all news that is even worth hearing or reading about is found for free online; from unbiased sources. Any magazine run by entertainment 'critics' that features groups like Limp Bizkit or Britney Spears on it's cover and other such groups should not be taken seriously. If you can find me a credible music critic that actually thinks Limp Bizkit or Britney Spears are important enough or have great music to be on a cover, then I'll smash my copy of Kid A and declare my love for a magazine full of ads that smells funny."
No comments:
Post a Comment