I used to subscribe to Rolling Stone Magazine. Back in my college years I loved getting the magazine every month and devouring the thoughtful, well written articles on music and politics. The writers, like Hunter S. Thompson and Cameron Crowe were reason enough to read the magazine. Heck I even remember reading and enjoying P.J. O'Rourke, before he turned into a conservative git with no sense of humor. But in recent years, in a desperate attempt to be relevant, Rolling Stone has become an horrific joke.
Case in point, putting the Boston Marathon Bomber on the cover as if he were someone deserving of fame. The only reason to put him on the cover is if he were still a wanted man, so that people would be on the lookout for him. It used to mean something to be on the cover of Rolling Stone; usually a musical act but more recently politicians have been on the cover. I get it. An interview with Barrack Obama means he is on the cover. Check. However this month's cover is just too much. Kim Kardashian and her over-oiled pushed up boobs "grace" the cover. The focus of the photo is NOT her cheesy smile and her overly kohled eyes. Nope, it's her main asset ( well two of them, as she is really more famous for her posterior) Just WHAT is that woman doing on the cover? Cheesecake. She is trying desperately to prove she is a savvy businesswoman, but I am not buying it. Her mother pimps her out. Shamefully, and the "momager" is doing this with all her children. She wanted a career in show biz and when she couldn't have it, devised a way to become famous through her children. Isn't that some twisted version of Munchhausen's by proxy? But I digress. What musical or political input does Kimmy K have ( other than sleeping with Kanye West, that is) Have you ever heard her "music" Do yourself a favor and DON'T. She is more famous for her sex tape and who she has "dated" more than her business acumen. The cover shot made me wonder just how much her machine paid to get her there. In my mind, Rolling Stone is officially a joke, it might as well be the National Enquirer or even better, the News of the World. Not a day goes by that my news feed online does not have some tidbit about that family ( News Flash Kourtney K clips her toenails) as if the world breathlessly awaits anything that these people do. It's a shame, we know more about them than we do about the Iran nukes deal or global warming.
Still, it's a shame that a magazine once considered the 'go-to" for news and reviews away from mainstream media has been sucking down the Kool-aid in large amounts. Can you say "sell out"? I knew you could.
I remember the "controversial" cover when Kanye (not yet known for his Kardashian Connection - couldn't resist it! - or his awards show hi-jinks) was on the cover wearing a crown of thorns. That pretty much pissed me off and finished me with that rag. BUT - it is always humbling to learn I can be wrong, and they could, indeed, keep going ever lower. Is there a special circle in Dante's Hell for this family? ANd, by extension, the Jenners? Bruce/Caitlin COULD be doing so much good for the transsexual community - but no - apparently,so far, except for a brief (much-publicized, naturally!) visit to the LGBT Center, being a new transsexual woman means prancing around in frocks most women will never be able to own, and going to irrelevant places most women can never go to. That article was anew low for that magazine, too, and the Liebowitz photos were really disgusting.
ReplyDeleteHave I digressed enough? All in all, Robyn is too, too right.
And why do I feel Bruce Caitlin is just another spin-off from Kris Jenner's machinations for further fame and fortune?
NO! No more Rolling Stone, no more Vanity Fair, and NO MORE KARDASHIANS!
Tom