Comments on: Rolling Stone: Rock Hall Now ‘Bonosteen’ Hall of Fame

By: optimist

optimist — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 04:03:31 +0000

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)

By: Pat

Pat — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:32:18 +0000

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?!”

By: Loonesta

Loonesta — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 01:34:55 +0000

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.

By: Tuesday Afternoon

Tuesday Afternoon — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:45:38 +0000

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.

By: Johnny Blade

Johnny Blade — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:26:33 +0000

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.

By: martinamerica

martinamerica — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:18:33 +0000

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…

By: Ingrid

Ingrid — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:45:13 +0000

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.