Rolling Stone is owned by Jann Wenner and so is the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. So it should come as no surprise that the new issue of Rolling Stone — now shrunk to the proportionate size of its owner — is a sad reflection of the Hall’s shortcomings on the occasion of its 25th anniversary
Let’s start on the cover: Bruce Springsteen, Bono, Mick Jagger. Jagger wasn’t even one of the hosts of the anniversary shows last month. Stevie Wonder was; there’s only one feature sized photo of him in the issue, and that’s with Smokey Robinson.
But there are roughly eleven — 11 — photos of Springsteen including the cover, nine — 9 — of Bono, and eight — 8 — of Jagger in the special issue.
Sting played on two nights as a favor to the Hall and to Jeff Beck, and got one small black and white picture. Similarly, Ray Davies of the Kinks, Annie Lennox, BB King, Little Anthony and the Imperials, Dion DiMucci, Darlene Love — each got next to nothing. —, who has nothing to do with the Rock Hall except that she’s pals with Jann Wenner, got herself a bigger picture than anyone. I do not recall seeing her on stage.
There’s a tiny picture of guess what — the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Museum in Cleveland — buried in the back of the magazine.
The magazine should now be called “Bonography.” Or “Bruuuce.” Both it and the Hall of Fame are over, frankly. Rolling Stone long ago — like at least 1990 — ceased to be of interest to anyone, or important to the world of rock music. It’s now small and poorly thought out it’s a shadow of its former self — the RS of Chet Flippo, Ben Fong Torres, Jon Landau, Cameron Crowe, etc. (What ever happened to Parke Puterbaugh?)
As for the Hall of Fame, it’s a joke. It’s time to stop inducting people, close shop, seal off the voting process, and just raise money to keep the facility going. The shows on October 29 and 30th should have been the farewell. I went to the first show, and it was mostly a dull affair. To see Stevie Wonder excluded from the cover of Rolling Stone after the yeoman service he gave is an utter embarrassment. Publisher Wenner’s pandering to friends and associates is just a direct violation of whatever pact he made with his reading public back in 1967.
As for the abundance of redundant photos: they’re not Bono, Bruce, or Mick’s fault. But it’s just pathetic. Those three are the first to give credit to the real creators of rock, R&B, rockabilly, whatever. They know that Jerry Lee Lewis only opened the shows each night was because his benefactor, Steve Bing, underwrote him. (Thanks, Steve.) Little Richard and Chuck Berry weren’t so lucky. Neither was Chubby Checker. They know Wenner’s total disingenuousness. I am sure Bono, Bruce, and Mick are laughing as they page through this slip of a publication. Rolling Stone is now nothing but the historic record of Jann Wenner, nothing more.
P.S. I am told that writers of pieces that were “rerun” in this issue weren’t even paid. Rolling Stone considers itself the lifelong owner of its old stories. I wonder if Wenner would have tried to pull that stuff with Hunter S. Thompson or Ralph J. Gleason.
After this, I can’t wait to see the TV special edited down to four hours for HBO. If Rolling Stone is any indication, you can guess what we’re going to see.
November 16th, 2009 at 5:45 am
Well, that hardly seems fair, especially since Stevie Wonder has been a legend since his teens and Bono and Springsteen were late bloomers. I love them too but Stevie and the others should have gotten more props from the magazine.
November 16th, 2009 at 6:18 am
I got a gift subscription to Rolling Stone years ago. They keep sending them to me to try and “renew my interest.” It ain’t gonna happen. I honestly don’t see the appeal. It’s a second rate music magazine, and the news articles are consistently paranoid and laughable. It’s like someone took Tiger Beat and stuck in a bunch of radical liberal news articles. I’m sure Jonas Brothers fans will really love to read about congressional health care debates…
November 16th, 2009 at 7:26 am
Well I know many fans of Chuck Berry, Chubby Checker and Fats Domino are all livid by the fact these guys were not included in the ceremonies. Visiting their respective sites, there’s near bounty hunter comments being thrown at the Rock n Roll Hall of fame. Then again and as usual, the old are discarded just like so much landfill garbage. The RRHOF should have spared no expense to get these guys at the event. Two of the three are still actively touring so unless there was a scheduling conflict, this oversight is simply inexcusable. Not to take away from any of the people that did participate, they all deserved to participate however, all of them owe their careers to the original stars.
November 16th, 2009 at 8:45 am
First can anybody tell me who the “she” was in the fourth paragraph Roger is talking about who got preferential treatment? I’ve reread the thing a half a dozen times and I still can’t figure it out.
Now, sorry to hear so many of my favorite artists were treated so shabbily. And that Jann Wenner is such a douche.
I don’t really watch these anymore. As to Rolling Stone magazine I haven’t read it in years, but I did pick up a couple after Michael Jackson died and I was surprised by the quality of the reporting and the writing.
Too bad so much other stuff seems to be going haywire, because there are very few magazines devoted to music left anymore.
November 16th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Rolling Stone stopped being good when you didn’t any longer have to unfold it two times to read it. When it moved to New York.
November 17th, 2009 at 4:32 am
Jann Wenner’s doucheness goes back far beyond 1990. The first time it became abundantly clear to me was when one of his critics gave a deservedly bad review to one of the Stones’ third-rate, contract-fulfilling ’70s or ’80s albums (can’t remember exactly when). Wenner was so terrified that he might be dropped from Mick’s guest list that he wrote a fawning article in the next issue, basically cutting the legs off his own reporter for giving an honest (and accurate) appraisal and gushing on and on about how important the Stones are and how much they meant to rock (personally, I prefer the Kinks and could live without the Stones, but whatever). It was one of the most disgusting things I’ve ever seen, just a public BJ for Mick Jagger in print form. From that point on, I’ve considered that every issue of RS should have come with this motto emblazoned below the title: “Journalistic Integrity? What’s That?!”
November 17th, 2009 at 8:03 pm
Two great things about RS in recent years, Jann’s doucheness aside:
1. Matt Tiabi (sp) and esp his stories on financial meltdown
2. The story on zuckerberg (aka friend-scamming facebook douche)