Literal downsizing

According to Sunday’s New York Times, Rolling Stone is switching sizes. Instead of it’s current, classic, tabloid format, it will be changing to a more standard magazine size, as well as becoming perfect-bound, with the release of it’s October 30 issue on October 17.

The Times makes a big to-do about this, but I really just couldn’t care. I understand that Rolling Stone is pretty iconic in its current format. However, it’d be more impressive if the magazine was, say, I dunno… maybe covering artists with cultural relevance? Artists outside the mainstream? Not giving every Neil Young album four stars?

The format change is nice, or would be if I felt like spending money to read articles that really don’t mean anything to me. I always used to hate the fact that Rolling Stone would fall apart because it was so big and stapled together. Anymore, tho’ – I just don’t care. The magazine has the occasional good interview (the one with Robert Downey, Jr. in the current issue is pretty in-depth), but the reviews and features always cover artists who really don’t need the coverage, or only matter to people like Jan Wenner.

Nice try, folks. Maybe next time you’ll take a look at something like the late Punk Planet and see about getting reviews of bands that matter and articles that aren’t fluff pieces for people who are already ridiculously famous.

Dr. Hook & the Medicine Show – “Cover of the Rolling Stone” (from At His Best)