Wilco on the cover of Rolling Stone?

[Dude]

I don't want to jinx anything, but how about it?

[you ever seen a ghost?]

well, i was with you up until the Bob Dylan part. then you lost me big time.

 

-justin

[bcart12]

The problem is that the cover is what sells copies. RS chooses covers that will simply sell a lot of copies based on the cover alone. I love Wilco and think they are one of the best bands in music today but I don't think having them on the cover is going to sell a lot of copies.

 

Shit, they haven't even sold out a 1700 seat theater in Royal Oak, Michigan.

 

I just don't get it.

[Dude]

Yeah, there's been a lot of kiddies on the cover over the years. I'm not exactly sure what Zac Effron has to do with a magazine whose ostensible primary focus is

rock and roll. There is a fine line between covering cultural phenomenons and pandering to teens with disposable incomes, and RS has been guilty of the latter, which makes it a glorified Tiger Beat, I suppose.

 

Still, I'd like to think it's possible this time around.

[dondoboy]

Shit, they haven't even sold out a 1700 seat theater in Royal Oak, Michigan.

 

I just don't get it.

They will.

[mountain bed]

If it wasn't for someone like Matt Taibbi I would have no reason to use RS for anything except maybe to potty train a dog.

 

If Wilco makes the cover good for them. But I don't see that happening.

[Three dollars and 63 cents]

I don't think Nels will fit on the cover since they changed to the smaller format.

 

I bought RS for the first time in years a few months back when U2 was on the cover, and I was shocked by how much the content went downhill since I let my subscription lapse four or five years ago. Part of me would like to see Wilco get the attention we all know they deserve, and part of me is already thinking about the kind of people an RS cover may end up bringing to shows. We all know the type--people who go to shows to be seen more than to actually see and hear the performance and who spend most of the show talking or playing with their cell phones and annoying everyone around them.

 

Don't get me wrong--I love it when people discover Wilco and start loving their music, but I want it to happen on its own and not because somebody in Rolling Stone told them it's a classic/good/bad album. I voted for the last option, because I don't think RS has the power it once did, though.

[you ever seen a ghost?]

But see, Justin, that's my point. I'm not a desired demographic. I dont fit in with the Dylan crowd, I'm not into Disney stuff. RS doesn't focus on what I like, and that's OK because they need to sell magazines. I'm sure Gwen sells more covers than Sonic Youth/Wilco or any of the other bands I dig. I appreciate your admiration for Dylan, though.

 

it is a bit more complicated than that. even as a massive Dylan fan, i don't fit into their demographic either. i buy the issues with Dylan interviews/features (one every two or three years) and that's about it. RS is pretty much the only magazine (because they are so big) that Dylan even deals with. besides that, the reason we don't fit into their demographic is simply that we are apparently discerning music nerds. aside from featuring airbrushed pop stars that don't even make music on the cover, they generally heap praise on any pile of shit that comes across top 40 radio these days. they're literally the Entertainment Weekly of the music world. now, we can't be too elitist and say that the mag needs to only focus on the new Animal Collective album and an interview with Jandek, because we know the general public isn't going to buy that. and still, some of their essays and articles are quite nice, but the main focus of the magazine is supposed to be music and now their target market is apparently tweens and James Taylor-listening ex hippies. there has to be some middle ground, but whatever that middle ground is, RS isn't anywhere within sight of it

 

-justin

[Dude]

To me, this discussion is only relevant in terms of a career milestone. Wilco's achieved a few - several Grammy awards, an SNL guest spot, several Billboard top ten albums, an RIAA Gold record, etc.

 

The cover of RS isn't the milestone it used to be. Being on the cover of Rolling stone was something that people were inspired to write songs about... (not great songs, but still...) Even given the fact that the magazine has slid quite a bit over the years as far as relevance / importance, I'd still be pretty proud if they made it on there.

[you ever seen a ghost?]

yeah, the interview/feature would be nice too.

 

-justin

[Three dollars and 63 cents]

They'd also probably do a pretty good cover of "Cover of the Rolling Stone"

[Sir Stewart]

You guys have a short memory:

 

[Dude]

You guys have a short memory:

 

I'm sending you a bill for the keyboard I just spat Coke all over.

[myboyblue]

nice

 

I came in here to make a smarmy comment about Wilco being Dave Mathews Band but hats off to you, Sir Stewart.

[LouisvilleGreg]

For whatever reason I get a free Rolling Stone every month. I think it has to do with buying concert tickets. And though most of it is truly deplorable, there is almost always something worth reading. In recent issues there have been good to great interviews/features on Dylan, Kris Kristoferson and Steve Earle. I don't anticipate Wilco will ever be on the cover, because they bottom line is Wilco wouldn't help them sell any extra magazines. I think a John interview is coming soon though.

[Guest Alan]

They'd also probably do a pretty good cover of "Cover of the Rolling Stone"

Phish did when they made the cover. It really isn't what it used to be though. a couple of months ago there were two chicks on the cover that I didn't even recognize.

[LouieB]

You guys have a short memory:

 

You beat me to this..........I was about to say that they would have to be naked to sell, since for awhile there everyone was naked....

 

Just for the record I bought my first copy of Rolling Stone in 1969 for the Dylan interview......haven't bought a copy in decades....

 

LouieB

[W(TF)]

That cover is hilarious.

 

I've given up on crap like this. If RS did do a feature on Wilco, it would be hopelessly retarded and pigeonhole our boys into some kind of roots/Americana niche culture purveyors, oh how quaint. Instead of just coming out and saying the band fuckin' smokes, which RS' editors are apparently too stupid to realize. No thanks.

 

Well they could redeem themselves with a cover and headline touting "America's best band"...but they missed the boat and it would be tough to explain that after so many years wouldn't it. Even in terms of national pride this situation is a total disgrace. How many times has Radiohead been on the cover?

[barbkm]

Jeff must have shaved his chest for this.

 

Friggen funny!

 

Ya know, Wilco is only good for those short one column features that focus on the less poppy, more rockin originals. It's sad the RS has gone from featuring the real influencial, important artists that define an era. Pretty soon, Jon & Kate will be on the cover discussing the music the kids listen to during the divorce. "That Aiden seems to gravitate toward Radionhead, while Mady favors Rammstein."

 

Oh-- hate Kate now. Can't watch that show, even tough I love that Aiden.

[mpolak21]

Rolling Stone did a pretty lengthy feature on Tweedy/Wilco when Ghost came out, I think I bought that one on the way back from Bonnaroo in 2004, anyway here it is from their archives: Cure for Anxiety

 

Barbkm, sadly I am only vaguely aware of these John and Kate people are, but I seriously found your last paragraph to be hysterical and spot on. The decline of mainstream music magazines over the last few decades has been extremely depressing.

 

--Mike

[Analogman]

I don't know about a cover, but they have been mentioned in about every issue as of late.

 

One from 1997:

 

Not Just a Country Rock Band

 

 

They're touted as a post-Nirvana answer to glitzy '90s Nashville, but Wilco aren't just another country-rock band.

 

Rolling Stone

March 20, 1997

Text: David Fricke

Photos: Raymond Meeks

[dunnright00]

Speaking of RS, what happened to their format?

 

Someone at work brought in a stack from the last 8-9 months, and I thought they were like mini-samples. Smaller page-size, no more saddle-stich binding and about an inch thinner.

 

I guess times are tough all around...

[Calexico]

I bought this magazine a few times over the last few years and it has almost always been a bunch of tremendous shite. Have the band never been on the cover? Is it like the music mags over here where you will only find The Beatles, The Who, Led Zep, Neil, Bob and other "classics" on the cover? I suppose the cover image is just there to sell the mag anyway.

 

 

As Hank Moody said...

 

"You write for Rolling Stone and you don't like music? Oh I forgot, you write for Rolling Stone."

[JerseyMike]

There is a fine line between covering cultural phenomenons and pandering to teens with disposable incomes, and RS has been guilty of the latter, which makes it a glorified Tiger Beat, I suppose.

 

I'm sorry, did I miss something over the past 40 years? When Rolling Stone first appeared with John Lennon on the cover in 1966, who was that aimed at? 40 year old hipsters? I don't think so. The Beatles were every bit "Tiger Beat" as Zac Ephron ever was. I'm pretty sure Rolling Stone has always been aimed at younger readers.

 

I also find it hilarious that everybody here is ripping Rolling Stone when all they have done is pretty much kiss Wilco's ass.

[Moss]

I have a lifetime subscription so I am stuck with it no matter what happens, but actually I still like it. Some very good political stuff (Matt Taibbi), articles on interesting people (Cornell West this month), and oh yes, some up to date music news.

 

Having said that, I would be surprised to see Wilco get the cover but it's not out of the realm of possibility.