Is anything in this Rolling Stone article newsworthy?
October 16th, 2008 by jjbtags: billy corgan, interview
Smashing Pumpkins Prep New Album, 20th Anniversary Tour
Reunited band breaks out classic tunes for tour; concept disc to follow
DAVID BROWNE
Posted Oct 30, 2008 9:59 AM
For an article that was posted in the future, this one is low on shock value. There are a couple of fun quotes, including Billy Corgan referring to himself as “a guitar hero” (note lowercase!), and a hint that the Schroeder/Reyes Pooley/Harriton combo will be joined by “to-be-determined additional musicians” on the new tour. (Keep that accordion handy, Mr. Pooley.)
Anyone see something else in there we don’t already know?
October 16th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
that’s a rhetorical question, right?
these days and around this site… well yeah!
$$$$marketing$$$$ exposure.
come on, come on, come on - can you feel it? it doesn’t have to be news, newsworthy, or worthy. and they are thankful to get it!
October 16th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
That quote of Billy’s at the end made me ROTFLRH.
That was worth reading the rest of the article of nothing new.
October 16th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
dddarrrceee???? jajajaaaammeessses???? could bee. or not could bee.
October 16th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
then again. it COULD bee…joe the plummer!
he’s not really a plummer, it seems. and may be lookin’ for a musician job.
October 16th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
Billy is right, he is no better than Bon Jovi these days…
October 16th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Pins, that is far from the critique we expect out of you and far from being witty.
try again.
October 16th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Well at least Billy called himself a guitar hero
October 16th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Ehh, I tried Cherub. As jjb said, the article wasn’t really newsworthy. :-)
Though Bon Jovi’s not the best comparison, as they still have current popularity, albeit they had to go country to do so. Maybe use Def Leppard and their Stanley Cup hatin’ ways?
October 17th, 2008 at 9:05 am
If its non news then why are you bothering to blog about it?
October 17th, 2008 at 9:59 am
good question. could bee some postmodernish attempt at writing nonnews about nonnews for nonnewsness to create knew-news.
or it could not bee.
October 17th, 2008 at 10:15 am
Not to be critical, but I seriously doubt the mainstream kids who read Rolling Stone every month really pay that much attention to the minutia of SP news, and as such, I doubt we can blame the publication or writer for not being on the cutting edge in their reporting.
Are you forgetting that nobody outside of the diehard SP fanbase gives a shit?
October 17th, 2008 at 10:39 am
Good point deathrockduck. They are forgetting that no one outside the SP fanbase gives a shit because they expect everyone ever to bow down before Billy and Jimmy.
A news blurb from Rolling Stone isn’t for the already in the know fans because obviously we already know. Deal with it HU, and quit reporting on it.
October 17th, 2008 at 10:51 am
HU should report on everything. I believe that’s what blogs are for.
October 17th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Here’s a rhetorical question for you:
If “nobody outside of the diehard SP fanbase” cares about the band, then why the heck is “G.L.O.W.” (a song which has received mediocre reviews from the aforementioned diehard fanbase) — why is it at #23 on the modern rock charts?
Also, have they explicitly stated this before, outside of talking about how it will be released?: “Early next year, the Pumpkins will begin recording what Corgan calls a “long-ranging concept album.”"
October 17th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Honestly, though no one may believe it, I didn’t intend the headline to be all that rhetorical or sarcastic — but I completely understand why it came off that way. I literally had about 10 minutes in which to put together this post or it wasn’t going to get made for another 12 hours, so I decided to go for it. As a result it wasn’t very good.
October 17th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
There you go again talking about what # “G.L.O.W” is on the charts. Who cares?
October 17th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Anon, you have lots of great ideas for how to run a blog.
October 17th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
anon, it could beetrue what jjb says. or not.
what number IS GLOW now. wait. i’m remembering now. i don’t care. ;)
October 17th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
I’m not arguing with you guys. I was just making a point that there is a gap between folks who read this site and folks who read Rolling Stone for news. That gap exists. Anyone that reads this site does it because they are already die-hard SP fans (or former fans that like to get their hate on). I understand that jjb is trying to show that the media is still kind of hard on our favorite band, but seriously, Rolling Stone is mainstream media… people who read mainstream media may be unaware that there are blogs such as this that give them their news a lot faster.
I love this site and the writers. I wouldn’t come here and comment on shit if I didn’t care.
And arguing G.L.O.W’s placement on the radio charts isn’t the best tactic. It’s great that they are getting airplay, but who seriously listens to the radio with the intent to hear something fresh and new?
Radio has been a joke since the Telecommunications Act of 96 made it where corporate companies could owns infinite amounts of stations, as opposed to only a couple. This killed radio and made it a measuring stick for major labels to compare the sizes of their genitalia with one another.
Basically, having a hit song on the radio requires one thing… money. It certainly has little to do with talent, as I’m sure you’re already aware.
October 17th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
i’ll see to it that billy corgan walks out of here a free hotel.
October 17th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Again, I realize (especially given my tendencies as a blogger) why the headline may appear snarky or sarcastic, but it was not intended as such. I don’t begrudge Rolling Stone writing the article a bit, I completely understand that what’s in the article IS news to 99% of RS’s readers. But, let’s face it, it’s not news to our readers. My headline was supposed to be an honest question from me to our readers - an honest “am I missing anything that I should be pointing out?” But again, I had 10 minutes to do the post and the headline wasn’t written with enough precision to communicate my intent well. (Headlines can be particularly hard to write, by the way…)
I’m glad everyone understands that I think the band gets a raw deal from a huge swath of the press, haha. But as far as I can recall they have always gotten a fair shake from Rolling Stone and this latest story is perfectly respectful as well, in my view. Rolling Stone is a magazine, of course they are going to be slow on news relative to us. But they also interview Billy Corgan sometimes and thus they do break some news. Again, I was genuinely unsure if I was missing something new we should be picking up on.
October 17th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
Gotcha, man. Sorry for going overboard. I just can’t stop myself from typing sometimes. And also, stories like this always get my brain swirling as I’m in school working on a Print Journalism degree, so I get way too excited when it comes to this type shit. I love this site because it constantly makes blog posts about the media and their perceptions of the band. I just like to comment on it cause hopefully I’ll one day be the one you’re giving shit to. It’s like practice!
October 17th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
@ deathrockduck: You know, this is something jjb and I have talked about so many times I can’t count them all. It’s not only that the media has very strange perceptions of the band; they’re also completely inconsistent. (Erratic, perhaps? Let’s ask John McCain!)
It’s not hard to argue that ‘media’ in general is at a point in time where its very nature is changing because of oversaturation, competition, incentive, and self-interest. I think this especially true in entertainment media because there’s such a drive to be a taste-making publication because it’s so entwined with revenue.
The Pumpkins, spanning multiple ‘eras’ of media (if you consider it pre-and-post-internet), have attained various levels of status in these taste-making pubs. Critical reception is sooooo all over the map (to be expected), but the actual way the media engages with (or pokes fun at) the band is also completely unpredictable. That’s mostly why (I think) we cover media perceptions so much. I’m glad to hear you like it and your opinions are certainly valuable!
October 17th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Also, as a side note, I think all of what I said above is linked to music writers (can we really call them journalists any longer?) 1) being lazy with their words, 2) not fact-checking, 3) and not thinking about the implied meaning of their words. See my post today for another hilarious example of why I think the music media is a joke.