« Warner Bros Records Sued For Tracking Web Users |
| More Music Industry News: UMG & MTV Call Truce, FM Coming To Cell Phones, Facebook To Add Locations, uTorrent, Lennon & More »
UPDATE: I've now learned that this open letter was issued in 2002, but that doesn't stop Hypebot readers call out Rolling Stone for its hipocracy then and now below.
Hypebot readers weigh in with some strong opinions below.
from Rolling Stone Magazine via icanhasinternets
Bruce Houghton on 08/16/2010 in Major Labels | Permalink
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Hi pot this is the kettle calling you black.
Corey Crossfield |
08/16/2010 at 04:25 PM
Was this really from Rolling Stone? There is a wayward apostrophe and a lack of commas in "The kids swapping were like ten times more likely to buy CD's".
08/16/2010 at 04:31 PM
while I agree with what they are saying I just find it ironic to be coming from them? I mean how many times can you put the Boss or U2 on your cover Rolling Stone? Do they really need to be exposed to more people? When is the last time you actually made an effort to promote and find out about and expose NEW artists in your magazine - not counting the ones that you get “paid” by those Record Execs to pretend you like in your Top 10 list each year? So until you become an actual, reputable source for people who like new and more independent music you are also part of the problem.
08/16/2010 at 05:28 PM
Hah, I have been saying this for a couple of years. My phrasing is a bit different though.
"The RIAA's message to file-sharers is: Kids, you're better off if you listen to less music!"
Where's my royalties? :-)
08/16/2010 at 05:32 PM
Is this from a 2005 issue of RS?
Too bad YouTube came along and ruined the point RS was trying to make. Too bad kids still use file sharing services to get music. Too bad Pandora, MySpace and The Hype Machine offer the music discovery RS seems to think doesn't exist any more.
08/16/2010 at 07:51 PM
What is the point RS is trying to make? Is this supposed to be pushing the envelope? Does RS think they are sayng something that everyone in the music community doesn't already know? This makes them look like old grey haired men that have finaly caught on and they don't want to be the last ones to get to the party. This whole campaign is about 10 years too late. Maybe they should focus on the future of their revenue instead of 'printing' something that had relevance in 2001!!
08/17/2010 at 10:01 AM
While Rolling Stone may be full of crap,
you work for Billboard - a publication that in addition to your insightful writing is also known for pay walls, high print subscription rates and a more than occasional support of the people that buy advertising.
Bruce Houghton |
08/17/2010 at 11:08 AM
Seems Rolling Stone was wrong. I like Hypebot exposing Rolling Stone as being wrong.
Good work, Hypebot.
08/17/2010 at 12:18 PM
I must admit I am at a loss. What exactly is the point here?
If RS is being straight, then they're also being disingenuous, as others have pointed out. Not too mention more than a little silly.
If they're being ironic, the irony is lost on me.
Ceterum censo: Statements about kids who engage in file-barter being ten times as likely to buy CDs are absolutely hilarious. Probably that's why as the practice became popular, the sales of music went through the roof, all of us musicians are filthy rich now, the record labels are stronger than ever and we're all sitting around Hypebot laughing about how we used to come up with the most improbable schemes to get people to buy anything.
Glenn put it best: lame.
08/17/2010 at 12:28 PM
Bruce, this is an *eight* year old story -- RS wrote and ran this ad in 2002. I'm surprised that none of your readers remember this -- it was originally a full-page ad in the New York Times and it got plenty of mainstream media attention then.
Elephant Neverforgets |
08/17/2010 at 01:03 PM
It seems to me that all of us are at fault for the state of the current music industry. Both good and bad. Sure, there are new innovations that are changing the model like YouTube and Pandora...
But you ALL know that every single one of us has illegally pirated music at one point in our lives.
Seems to me this is just another forum to point fingers instead of starting a REAL revolution of change. File-sharing doesn't increase possibility of buying. That's the biggest load of BS I've ever heard. If anything, it makes people that WERE gonna buy an album have a sense of ownership or entitlement because they know "own" it on their hard drive. Psychological factor.
So, the moral of the story is Hypebot got too "hype" for running a story on an ad from 2002 and Rolling Stone is the mirror image of the labels, except in magazine format. Running cover stories on Jay-Z, Katy Perry, Lil' Wayne and the cast of "Glee" doesn't exactly count as 'seeking out new artists'. #doublefail
A.J. Crew |
08/17/2010 at 01:39 PM
Edit: "If anything, it makes people that WERE gonna buy an album have a sense of ownership or entitlement because they now 'own' it on their hard drive. Psychological factor."
Misspell. Sorry. Haha
A.J. Crew |
08/17/2010 at 01:47 PM
What is hipocracy? Sounds like the societal structure of pods of hippos.
The hypocrisy of this letter is really in the comments by those who don't understand that kids (in very general terms) these days will buy a magazine with Lady GaGa on the cover, and not some new artist (by new, read: smaller audience of fans). They should hot for Justin Beiber fans as well.
This 'old' opinion about record companies is indeed just that, but the kids don't even know what a record company is. And they would not have learned about their continued slide into irrelevance through reading newspapers or Billboard. Maybe they’ve subscribed to Lefsetz, but I doubt it very much. Who is telling them about this now-old-for-you fight? You show yourself to be part of the MTV-attention-span-generation by getting angry at others for keeping up the fight while you’re off trying to find the new cool thing to be angry at so you can seem hip to your shrinking pool of hipster friends…meanwhile, the fight does need to continue in the absence of your generalship.
If they read something like this, they might want to look into it, or at least do a little more to kill off these dinosaur corporate-music beasts by actually purposefully not buying anything from them.
Hopefully, this letter is just another in a long line of nails in the coffin and another of the rays of hope for a new, fairer music industry to arise.
Enjoy the bitterness.
08/17/2010 at 02:16 PM
Edit: They should *shoot* for Justin Beiber fans as well.
--- I know some of you would rather it said 'shoot at', but let's not be mean to the kids:-)
08/17/2010 at 02:21 PM
This ad was run in November 1999.
Get a grip people. Cool of Rolling Stone to do then. Today it would be disingenuous.
Josh Gertz |
08/17/2010 at 02:22 PM
What's Rolling Stone?
Bob Sack |
08/17/2010 at 03:18 PM
If this is a serious post from RollingStone then I do have a few things to say. And even if it's from 1999, I think my criticisms of the magazine in it's current state still apply.
"Seriously Rolling Stone??? When was the last time you wrote about a band relevant to any scene other than Pop, Top 40 and mainstream Alternative?
Sure, you might throw in an Arcade Fire now and again, but it's too few and far between for me to want to read your magazine. And that's sad, because when I was in college, your magazine was one of the most interesting around.
And of course you're going to argue that you put Kings of Leon on the cover. But that was AFTER they broke...where was relevant coverage of them 4 years ago???
Or how about covering some metal every once in a while? Or Electronic? Or maybe just give some coverage to new bands that are just starting to bubble; pick some artists that YOUR editors like, not what is playing on radio.
Give me a new reason to WANT to buy the magagine. I cared more about the Shaun White cover from a pop culture perspective than I cared to see another Springsteen or Dylan cover."
Shelly Hartman |
08/17/2010 at 03:22 PM
#1. if this is a recent post, surely they published this on April 1st. way to monday morning quarterback there, buddy.
#2 if RS posted this 2002, i WOULD have said "good for them" .. BACK THEN. if this is truly how they felt in 2002, they had 8 YEARS to back up those sentiments. How about covering something other then Black Eyed Peas, U2 and Gaga for the past decade? they could have redefined their magazine as something cutting edge... again. in this instance, they are worse than the record labels, since they "saw" it coming, but didn't do a GD thing to make a change. leaders get the glory and all that it comes with. but to lead you must take risks.
RS like any other publication, billboard included is yesterday's news.
Donald Fabio |
08/17/2010 at 04:23 PM
This just sounds like propaganda by Rolling Stone, they suck on the tit of major labels!
08/17/2010 at 08:59 PM
The apostrophe in "CD's" is acceptable, and I don't see any missing commas. Such good punctuation in this day and age seems imply reputability.
08/19/2010 at 10:19 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.