Is Rolling Stone racist?

Almost as bad as the decidedly non-rock-inflected singles "The Real Slim Shady" and "Without Me" getting modern rock airplay just cuz.

Rolling Stone's audience is predominately white. They are "rock" fans. RS wants a young audience, but realistically, their audience is in their 30's and 40's - not exactly the audience for rap or r'n'b music (well, maybe "conscious" rap or r&B). Are they racist, or are they playing to their demographic? Can they be both?

I personally don't worry about Rolling Stone, except to chortle helplessly at certain album reviews and Rob Sheffield's hilarious take on Kurt Cobain's journal scribblings.

I don't think it's a racist mag, just a thoroughly irrelevant one that for some reason is still kicking around and earning respect despite said irrelevance (much like the band with whom it shares a name).

(Oh, and I subscribe to Rolling Stone. I read every issue. I think Rob Sheffield is a great writer.)

No twofer. Just Clay. That's the confusing part.

Did Ken Stabler not see Cliff Branch? Or is he a racist? YOU MAKE THE CALL.

Actually, there's a lot of dispute about Ruben actually winning. Conspiracy theories abound, as with most reality shows. As someone who was really into American Idol for no possible reason I can imagine, I can tell you that they were a fuck of a lot more Clay fans online than Ruben fans.

Do you seriously think that Vibe is a "quote" niche magazine? Is that a more inherently racist assumption than any guess around Rolling Stone's covers?

Not that I think you're racist, Yanc3y, but I think the assertion that Vibe is "niche" is one of the silliest things I've ever seen on ILM.

Justin, Em, and Xtina are fucking great you guilty-liberal fuck.

Like okay yeah throw xtina out then elvis then the beatles then the yardbirds then ALL ROCK EVER and then um, all euro-rave, all techno not made by mills & co., all punk that's dub inflected and etc. coz that's all "stealing" and et fucking c. Then what do you have? Boring bland motherfucking segregationist seperate-but-equal cultural "purity"!!! Yeah white boys and girls can stop jacking hip-hop and R&B when rappers stop sampling music that's written using the 12-tone scale. Step, fool.

1) rich is a close friend of mine ("guilty-liberal fuck" you called him)
2) his argument above (he and i talked about this earlier today) has nothing to do with the elvis-chuck d beef or any of the rest of that tired shit, all he's saying (and correctly, i believe) is that it seems like when rs is faced with the choice of putting a black artist on their cover or their white counterpart, 120 times oughtta 100 rs picks the honky. so why is that? is it for the same reason that a million hacks have said elvis made rock big ("white america felt safe with mr. presley, unlike the dark-toned folks from which he stole his stylings")? is it cuz black faces, for some reason, don't sell?

anyway, my point is i'm not about to argue with what you say above cuz ofuckingcourse that's the case. but rich (if i can speak for him) wasn't trying for something that broad.

HA: What was the purpose of putting Eminem on the cover of Rolling Stone?

JL: We were attempting to explain about Eminem and his work.

HA: What does it mean to call him a 'genius' in terms of being the most covered hip-hop artists at Rolling Stone? Why not Jay-Z on the cover?

JL: I can't speak to the way he's been contextualized. He outsold anyone else by two to one. Our job is to cover him in any way that we can. It's a commercial proposition. At a certain level, it's that reductive. A commercial proposition is part of it.

What would it take for Jay-Z? It would take the confidence that we would be as successful with those covers. hip hop covers haven't been extraordinary successful for us in the past. We're not trusted as a hip-hip authority?

HA: Well, why put Enimem on the cover?

JL: As he might agree, he's blown up bigger than that. It did work when we did it before. He's the biggest thing in the music industry.

HA: What does his whiteness have to do with this?

JL: It's not incidental. To say that it's not a factor is ridiculous. He said that he'd sell 1/2 the records if he wasn't right. Obviously it has something to do with it.

HA: In the article, it says 'no one denies that his race has a lot to do with his popularity?' What does that mean?

JL: I don't think it's a simple question. What do you think?

HA: Please tell me first.

JL: It's part of what of what he says is a big factor. He's more acceptible to a broad-based audience. He makes pop singles too. It's been a factor since the start of his career.

HA: By saying the 'genius', how's that different than 'success'?

JL: We wanted these stories to address his particular genius, whatever it is. We hoped that we might explain some of that.

HA: By hailing this artist and having him on so many covers, to have a cover that says 'genius' for him but not have Jay-Z on the cover...

JL: This mistakes us for a hip-hop mag. Also, Britney's had more Rolling Stone covers than Eminem.

HA: Do you see the use of 'genius' as...

JL: I see it as a cover line of what some of the intention of the piece and to attract the eye of a potential reader...

HA: And it has no other context where a white man dominates a black artform?

JL: Harry, I answered your question already.

"I hate all this crap! But I'm going to give you FUCKERS what you want! Now, a Nickelback cover."

hee hee.

with sticks.

i like the personable touch that only pointy sticks can provide.

http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ld/projects/trc/2002/manual/images/bilingual/stick.jpg

Trife is pretty rational though so I'm not sure where you're going with this.

BUFFY: You named your stake?

Kendra: (a bit embarrassed) Yes.

BUFFY: (smiles) Remind me to get you a stuffed animal.

(1) Is Rolling Stone simply bowing to critiscism and backpeddling furiously by putting him on the cover in an effort to save face?

(2) *WHO*GIVES*A*FUCK*ABOUT*AMERICAN*IDOL*ANYWAY?

*=This was an actual comment made by the owner of MTV, re "black music" before they bought out by Viacom.

Bump for Twitter's trip back into the time machine to Dec. 2010.

People don't like Elvis?

^I mean, I don't really either, but that seems to be what people are upset about the most.

people seem to be mad at dylan at #7 best singer ever.

but all my favorite singers couldn't sing

this thread is so good actually

We need to bring TNC back to ILM.

"bob dylan can't sing" is the most boring and eternal of takes

otm

Is Vibe racist? They only put black people on their cover.

Post #4, lol... very efficient thread

I am done

I agree 100%.... I love Tom Waits, but he is NOT a great singer.

— The Rev (@revchristopher) October 21, 2019

how can you like tom waits and also think that he's not a good singer? he can do things with his voice that absolutely nobody else can, or would even think to do. you don't need to have to sound like a pure angel to be a good singer, fergodsake.

he can do things with his voice that absolutely nobody else can, or would even think to do

Thank God.

Anyway, he said great singer.

agreed. is mike patton a good singer? I'd say so.

he is a great singer. learn to embrace your fellow tom!

"bob dylan can't sing" is the most boring and eternal of takes

Also the truest.

i’ve spent a lot of time listening to bob dylan and it isn’t remotely true

crazy to see Ta-Nehisi Coates in an ILM thread

"Joe ****er"

xp. imagine the direction his life could have taken if he had gotten really into having back and forths with geir or deej on here all day

lol

"Couldn't agree with you more, Coates."

(this is a good thread, btw)

"bob dylan can't sing" is the most boring and eternal of takes

― american bradass (BradNelson), Monday, October 21, 2019 5:26 PM (five hours ago)

^^^ so true

it is frustrating how ppl who would probably recognize what dumb reactionary bullshit the "you have to sing a certain way to be a GOOD singer" attitude is if they heard it applied to, like, bjork or yoko ono or joe strummer or howlin' wolf or whoever -- these same ppl will turn around and insist that dylan "can't sing," rather than just "i don't like bob dylan" (which is totally fine). never stops being incredibly fucking annoying.

people who think bob dylan can't sing should hear me sing "sara" in the shower

people who think bob dylan can't sing should hear bob dylan sing "sara" in the shower

I'd have to go back and figure out how this relates to the thread title, but: up to and including 1966, Bob Dylan couldn't sing brilliantly, then he couldn't sing exceptionally well up until 1974, and after that, a lot of the time, he couldn't sing.

lol xp

bob dylan is obviously one of the best singers in the history of sound recording; didn't know there was still a contrarian school on this.

it's because he's such a good singer that it's okay he's such an uneven writer.

i screamed at joe ****er