Is Rolling Stone Dead? A Cover Story Nets Just 2000 New Fans [Best Of Hypebot]
All week we'll be featuring the best and most popular articles that appeared on Hypebot in 2011. This one is by regular contributor Robin Davey.
The cover of a recent issue of Rolling Stone Magazine featured a relatively unknown band called The Sheepdogs. They found themselves there by way of a competition, beating out numerous other acts to be selected as the cover stars.
A few days after Rolling Stone landed in my physical inbox, I wondered what impact this would have on the bands popularity in this very digital age. So, using the barometer that so many artists and industry people like to use to determine the worth of a band, I started watching the likes for the Sheepdogs Facebook page.
What can a feature on the front of the most regarded and iconic musical magazine get you?
Over the two-week period that this particular issue covered, the band mustered up about 2000 Facebook likes. When I first looked it stood at a little over 10,000, now it stands and just under 12,000.
Is that really the weight that Rolling Stone has in the current market?
If so, it would appear that opinionated music journalism is certainly stumbling if not already dead. Indeed, why rush out to see what Rolling Stone thinks when you can hear it for yourself on Spotify, or see the latest video on Youtube.
The old music industry used to be all about the middleman, but now the age of the middleman has gone. We are now in the age of the middle machine, it is a mechanism that simply connects us with what we want, sure it can be programmed to make suggestions based on our activities, but on the whole, we expect to search for something, and have it delivered instantly.
From an artists point of view this can be very demoralizing, the holy grail of landing a record deal is quickly vanishing. Those in the industry with the weight to bring you to the forefront of the scene are seeing their outlets disappear and become irrelevant. This destroys the romanticism of being discovered playing to a handful of people in a small bar.
The current age of social connectivity is a mechanism for the people, not for big money business. People share things that connect with them, not things they are told that they should be connecting with. Your music career now hinders on the your ability to be the best of the best, to stand out from the crowd, because once you do that, the people will do the work for you.
The Sheepdog issue of Rolling Stone stands testament to the fact that the days of manufacturing Rock stars are numbered. The Major labels try and get a piece of whatever emerges in the new industry, however, unless they realize that manufacturing artists is what is killing the value of music, they will never recover from the pit they have created for themselves.
Hypebot contributer Robin Davey is an independent musician and Head of Music & Film Development at GROWvision.
I don’t think you can make a direct correlation here. This is assuming that most of Rolling Stones readers actually give two shits about facebook. Facebook is fading as well and with all the crap I have to read now that it is so full of clutter, it reminds me of myspace. The real test is whether or nto they’re selling more records.
Very good new band. Very awful magazine that has not been relevant in 10… 20… years.
While you raise some very good points, I have to agree with the commentators above.
I don’t “like” every artist on Facebook whose album I buy. I also don’t own albums for all the artists on Facebook that I do “like”.
People are also inherently lazy. I wonder if a QR code on the front cover that took you directly to the band’s website or Facebook profile would have further increased their fan count.
Print media is dying and needs a breath of new life before it becomes extinct.
I agree with the first commentator in that you didn’t directly establish correlation between the two. At the end of the day it’s still Rolling F’ing Stone and no matter what the digital age thinks it’s a huge milestone to be on the cover. Maybe people just don’t like The Sheepdogs music as crazy as that thought may seem.
Rolling Stone 1967 ——–> Pitchfork 2001
you’re asking a reader to change mediums from print to online, which is a giant leap for consumers to make. the story has to be incredibly powerful/inspirational, and if not, there has to be a big, immediate “what’s in it for me” for them to do that. while a contest that put you on the cover of rolling stone isn’t going to change your life, a more accurate assessment of rolling stone’s influence would be if the mobile- or tablet-based cover story had an interactive layer, like a “like the sheepdogs on facebook” button.
This is the silliest article I’ve read recently. From a marketing perspective, when it comes to the bottom line, all Rolling Stone cares about is subscription and advertising dollars; Facebook “likes” are neither a direct or indirect correlation to revenue generated from the magazine. Furthermore, to say the days of manufacturing rock stars are over is also disingenuous; in fact, I’d argue it’s happening more than ever.
Perhaps, your headline should read does anyone give a shit?
Rolling Stone is so much more than just a music magazine.
i find it very interesting that a cover spot on Rolling Stone didn’t bring more to the Sheep Dogs online following. Not that i think it discredits Rolling Stone but i would say it shows some evolution of the music industry. I think 10 years ago that cover spot would have brought anyone quite a bit more attention whether they were the next big thing or not.
Selling records???? What’s that? Selling records is a thing of the past. And Facebook irrelevant? Hardly, they are just getting started. We are seeing the tip of the ice of this digital revolution and sonic revolution for producers. Welcome to the 21st century.
Rolling Stone has been dead for well over a decade
This quote from the piece, “the days of manufacturing Rock stars are numbered” is one of the most incredulous things I’ve read in weeks. Take a look at the Onion News video for K’ronnika’s Booty Wave and then look at the number of music videos on Youtube that have been created by “real artists” that are more ridiculous than the parody but have millions of views and positive comments. The song Swagger Jagger is a perfect example.
Regardless of the quality of this band, I think the fact that Rolling Stone had to resort to holding a contest to decide the cover says something about how the music industry & media coverage works these days… It’s all about voting and comparing apples with oranges. As an independent artist with as much merit as the next guy, but with considerably less ‘likes’ to cast votes, it’s a constant irritation. Kudos to The Sheepdogs.
http://www.thisislizzard.com