Rolling Stone Magazine Review

At its peak, Rolling Stone was a marvelous music and pop culture rag, while also dabbling in politics.  Over the years, the emphasis on music has lessened, the politics and pop culture has increased, and the quality of the magazine is not near where it was at it's peak in the early to mid 70s.  I don't even think RS themselves would try to say it was.  After all, it's a different time, and there's no real way to reconcile what they had going for them then, and what they have working against them now.  

With that being said, I can't help but laugh whenever I see people dismiss Rolling Stone completely.  Yes, I wish they'd focus a bit more on music too.  But it's not as if they've completely dropped the ball journalistically.  While their political articles can be a bit heavy handed (I mean honestly, I hate Shrub too, but I can do without the monthly article decrying something new about his administration...I honestly wonder what they're going to do in terms of politcal writing once Shrub is out of office), they are usually at least somewhat interesting.   

They have solid profiles regarding crime or a newsworthy case every month.  I still remember the article about the money counterfeiter they ran about 2 years ago; I haven't read a more fascinating article anywhere since.  Earlier this year, they took on Dateline NBC's "To Catch a Predator" series.  While I can't say I agreed with their larger point, they did make some valid smaller ones that made me look at the issue differently.   

As for their music coverage, I find that they do a good job of hyping what they feel should be the next big thing, while also covering bands that are selling records (though they might do their best to make you look moronic, as they did wonderfully with Hinder earlier this year).  Sure, they get behind some questionable acts, and as with every publication, certain acts can seemingly do no wrong.  But they seem to take a relatively even handed approach, especially in terms of reviewing albums.  The fact they also devote a part of a column to bootlegs you need to hear is pretty cool as well.  

Sure, they put out a dud issue every once in a while, where virtually nothing is of interest to me.  Yes, their year long look back at the "summer of love" is annoying, especially when they devote three entire issues to it (2 have already come out, a third is due out before the end of the year).  But for the most part, Rolling Stone is a relatively well-written and many times thought provoking publication.  

Is it perfect?  No.  Is it as good and vital as it once was?  No.  Is it worth the $12 a year for a subscription if you're a music fan?  Absolutely.