Rolling Stone Magazine Snub: "Premiere" Rock Magazine Opts for Tired Zeppelin Piece Over Syd Barrett Tribute

By Jetlag Democracy, published Aug 18, 2006
Published Content: 449  Total Views: 714,567  Favorited By: 23 CPs
Rating: 3.1 of 5


I recently sent a letter to Rolling Stone magazine, the "premiere" rock n' roll publication that I have been getting for almost a decade, because they neglected to properly honor the founder of Pink Floyd. More than that though, it was WHO they opted to grace the cover instead of the late great Syd Barrett. Instead of memorializing one of rock music's most innovative and important voices, the man who created one of earth's most notorious bands, they decided to run a six page apology to Led Zeppelin, an outfit which has consistently trumped Pink Floyd for media exposure for a long time.

First, let me tell you about this idiotic Led Zeppelin piece. For some reason- well I know the reason, they want to sell more magazines- Rolling Stone ran this rehashing of the Zeppelin story in the middle of August because, I guess, it was a slow couple of weeks in the world of popular music. If you're a real music fan, and I suppose that most people who subscribe to this magazine are, than you probably know much of the so-called Led Zeppelin saga. You may have even read the famous Led Zeppelin biography, Stephen Davis' "Hammer of the Gods." This is one of the most famous rock books ever written and when I started to read Rolling Stone's recent cover story, the stench of familiarity hung in the air, thickly-like.

Rolling Stone and Led Zeppelin had quite the fragmented relationship in the 60's and the 70's. While the band took off, commercially speaking, they never garnered the critical success that (would have) meant so much to them. The leading negative voice throughout the height of their career was Rolling Stone magazine. It is a well-known anomaly that the publication has never given Zeppelin "their due," so the fact they RS ran what amounts to an apology is not very surprising at all.

What is an unforgivable, however, is the timing of this "apology." Rolling Stone, who devoted a cover issue to the death of their hero, counterculture journalist Hunter S. Thompson, have usually done right by fallen legends. They're normally not the kind of publication who "sells out" to sell more magazines. Until now that is.

Barrett gave Rolling Stone the last interview he ever did in 1971.

Credit: google images

Copyright: google images

Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 4 of 4
 
 
Yeah, Rolling Stone does still publish the occasional piece worth reading and it's fun to flip through. While it's clearly about the money and no longer a very credible underground journal of the youth culture it actually seems fairly balanced in terms of its coverage of both "old" and new music, but don't expect MOJO -- cuz it ain't what it once was.

Posted on 08/21/2006 at 6:08:00 PM

 
i read Mojo and about a dozen other mags but I still check out RS because behind all the crap on the cover there are usually a few good articles

Posted on 08/21/2006 at 7:08:00 AM

 
Most of the great music I listen to now--all over it over over twenty years old--I first latched onto because of Rolling Stone, esp. Greil Marcus. They did have the power to bring new acts to light that would never--most of whom never did--appear on American radio. But I always found it disturbing how much Rolling Stone overpraised and overexposed their namesakes, the Rolling Stones. I haven't read the magazine in well over a decade. It is obsolete.

Posted on 08/21/2006 at 7:08:00 AM

 
I think Britney Spears or Christina Aguilera was on the cover the month Joey Ramone died. And I don't recall seeing Joe Strummer either on the cover when he passed. They probably had Green Day on there instead. I said "Whatever" to that mag a long time ago. I like MOJO.

Posted on 08/19/2006 at 2:08:00 PM

Type in Your Comments Below
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 4 of 4
 
Most Commented On