A Magazine Back on a Roll - Rolling Stone

[groovedaddy]

In its early days in the 1960s and ’70s, Rolling Stone was a chronicle of the counterculture where a generation of young people came to find political coverage that spoke to their disaffection.

Then those baby boomers grew up, and Rolling Stone’s voice seemed to fall flat.

But no more. Those same subversive tendencies that led Jann Wenner to help found the magazine in 1967 were reawakened under the presidency of George W. Bush. And now, rather unexpectedly, Mr. Wenner’s magazine is hitting its journalistic stride — aggressively tackling the American government on financial regulation, the environment and the war in Afghanistan — with a Democrat in the White House, one that Mr. Wenner supported.

Mr. Wenner said Rolling Stone’s more antagonistic tack is, in a sense, a way of shaking off the cultural complacency many liberals felt in the 1990s.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/business/media/28stone.html?th&emc=th

[Democrats_win]

1. They're going after the establishment: Goldman Sachs especially.

For several years Rolling Stone has been one of the first magazines I read because of their reporting. Now if we can get people to read Harpers Magazine.

[maxsolomon]

2. i don't look to them for music criticism anymore

too many pop stars on the cover - janet jackson topless, gaga in a thong. the "hot" issue.

bleah.

[missheidi]

3. Music wise, not really,

but socially and politically, they do rock.