"Like a Rolling Stone"

I thought that as long as I'm sitting here waiting for my iPod to charge before heading to the library, I might as well blog. I know I'm spoiled, but sometimes, I just can't handle the depressing, sterile environment of the campus library without my trusty, apple green friend to drown out the stupid people and keep me from having yet another anguished existential crisis. (For some reason, the campus library seems to spark those)

Anyway, I feel like ranting about something that has been bugging me:

The Rolling Stone has for many years held the respect of the music-loving world. A household name, it has established itself as a venerable source for concert reviews, band profiles, etc.

However, lately, I've noticed that the magazine is diverging from the high standard of music journalism that has music geeks and journalists alike drooling into their Cheerios.

It seems that the magazine is increasingly pandering to the celebrity-obssesed, teeny bopper crowd. It used to be a major accomplishment to get the cover of Rolling Stone. Now, any flash-in-the-pan can get featured.

I get that maybe you want expand into more of a general entertainment magazine, especially with the ever-downsizing climate of journalism these days. I totally get the whole "keeping current" and "making yourself more marketable" thing, but you're the fucking Rolling Stone! You don't need this.

Last month's cover featured Britney Spears. Reading down the list of teasers also on the cover ("Twilight's Sexy Vampire," "Gossip Girl's Mean Girl"), I felt like I was reading an issue of People. It's not just a one-time thing, either. Other covers have featured Brad Pitt, Barack Obama (nobody can say that I don't support Obama, but what does he have to do with music?), Chris Rock, The Hills (The HILLS!), Robert Downey Jr. and 30 Rock.

I know I'm probably coming off as a purist, but please, Rolling Stone. Leave the celebrity gossip to the celebrity magazines. There are enough of those already.