Music

Rolling Stone reconsider their terrible reviews of classic albums

by Richard Howard

I think we can all agree that Rolling Stone is one of, if not the most well-known music publication in the world. And however questionable their relevance is today (when you put Kim Kardashian on the cover of your music magazine, you immediately deserve a GTFOH order), they’ve certainly raised the profiles of some vital artists over the years.

At the same time, Rolling Stone also famously shit the bed when sharing their initial assessment of a number of artists. Their usual reaction is “who, us?” (and occasionally, surreptitiously raising a review’s star rating while no one’s looking). Recently, Executive Editor Nathan Brackett took to the Rolling Stone Music Now podcast to own up to some of the magazine’s most high-profile gaffes. The segment starts at 5:40.

Brackett, along with Associate Editor Andy Greene and Senior Writer Brian Hiatt, delved into the magazine’s most ridiculed reviews, shamefacedly (and hilariously) cringing at the brutal abuse some now-revered albums received.

Still, in defending their employer, they pointed out how most of the reviewers had clearly listened closely to the albums before their short deadlines and got the bands’ influences and approaches to writing right – they just got the importance of what they were doing at the time horribly, horribly wrong.

So what have you learned, Rolling Stone? Well, I guess you’ve got to give it to Brackett for being pragmatic: “The moral of the story is no one knows anything, and just give us a break.” Sorry buddy, we’re going to keep busting your balls until you print a cover with nothing but the words “We’re sorry for the Kim thing.” Check out the gallery for the highlights of Rolling Stone‘s way-off reviews.