|
Peer to Peer The 3rd millenium technology! |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
01-11-02, 02:29 PM | #1 |
my name is Ranking Fullstop
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Promontorium Tremendum
Posts: 4,391
|
This Is Classic
Rolling Stone magazine placed this ad in the New York Times yesterday
This is a very expensive way to make an editorial statement ...wonder why they did it and why now? |
01-11-02, 06:56 PM | #2 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 275
|
I like it. I wonder if anyone besides p2p users noticed it?
|
01-11-02, 10:42 PM | #3 |
Spagal
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,662
|
did you scan it yourself, or is it posted somewhere?
__________________
|
02-11-02, 10:03 AM | #5 | |
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,024
|
Re: This Is Classic
Quote:
- js. |
|
02-11-02, 10:50 AM | #6 | |
my name is Ranking Fullstop
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Promontorium Tremendum
Posts: 4,391
|
Re: Re: This Is Classic
Quote:
Ok, this makes sense. This is Rolling Stone trying to preserve their psuedo anti-Establishment credentials and send a message to the industry at the same time. Logically, they probably like nothing better than to preserve the old status quo. They have as much of a vested interest in a homogenized market dominated by a handful of artists as do the radio stations and record industry. |
|
02-11-02, 12:23 PM | #7 |
Thanks for being with arse
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The other side of the world
Posts: 10,343
|
to show they are sincere they should start a big mofo FTP server with thousands of High Quality tunes...for FREE!
|
02-11-02, 04:01 PM | #8 | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 39
|
Re: Re: This Is Classic
Quote:
my guess is that it was just an ad for the magazine, formulated in the way to resonate best with their audience. i don't necessarily disagree with the rest of your analysis though. - jaan |
|
02-11-02, 04:42 PM | #9 | |
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,024
|
Re: Re: Re: This Is Classic
Quote:
if you look at their demographics (something rolling stone knows a bit about) and compare rs to the times you'll see immediately the two share few readers. if rs wanted to impress their own audience they just dropped about a hundred grand down a black hole. if however they wanted to get the attention of corporate america - including executives, investors, lawmakers and opinion leaders - they hit a home run. - js. |
|
02-11-02, 09:12 PM | #10 | |
WAH!
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 725
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: This Is Classic
Quote:
i'm not sure what rolling stones' point was (cuz i don't believe they honestly support file trading); but it wasn't to impress their readers who no way in fuck read or care about the ny times.
__________________
I hate hate haters |
|
03-11-02, 02:23 AM | #11 | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 39
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: This Is Classic
Quote:
- jaan edit: umm... i misphrased the above -- the message is of course dripping with sarcasm, but the sarcasm is directed the "wrong" way. or to put it another way, i totally fail to see how a record executive could read this ad and think "wow, these guys are really supportive of our cause!". edit2: to put it yet another way: the fact is that, to the reader of NYT who "gets" sarcasm (admittedly, some people don't), this message reads "RS believes what the record execs are currently doing is short sighted and dead wrong". agree? so tell me how exactly getting such message to millions (?) of people would advance the anti-filesharing cause? Last edited by jaan : 03-11-02 at 02:57 AM. |
|
03-11-02, 09:40 AM | #12 |
Earthbound misfit
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Moses Lake, Washington
Posts: 2,563
|
Maybe it's not to support an anti-filesharing cause. Maybe they're just echoing the letters they've recieved from their own readers. Rolling Stone has a large base of loyal readers, both consumers and musicians alike, and the editors probably feel some sense of responsibility to be a soundboard for those readers. Perhaps Rolling Stone doesn't support filesharing but they don't like the way the industry is handling it either. They're implying that the money is better spent developing new music rather than feeding lawyers and lobbyists. They're implying that the battle is being fought on the wrong turf. By saying 'the internet is just plain stupid' they're basically telling the industry that there are ways to ignore the internet and still make lots of money, but people like Hilary & Co. think they're fighting for a cause and they're not likely to get the message.
|
08-11-02, 12:59 AM | #13 |
just one of the gang...
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 1,777
|
i agree, Mazer.
very interesting ad. very interesting debate. nice to see the differing views as to it's meaning.
__________________
"rock on, all" |
15-11-02, 12:04 PM | #14 |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 17
|
"This is a very expensive way to make an editorial statement ...wonder why they did it and why now?"
"...computers are just a fad anyway, and the Internet is just plain stupid" Telling the world: The battles lost, the war is over? |
19-11-02, 03:44 PM | #15 |
Apprentice Napsterite and Music worshipper
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Living in southwest VA. respresenting NYC
Posts: 52
|
I noticed that on another forum and did not think it was actually real until now.
__________________
I'm y0ur l0cal audi0phile Kn0w a G00d tune? PM me a suggesti0n I am always l00king for a g00d music review/music community(f0rum), If y0u kn0w 0ne, PLEASE pm me a link. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|