Eddie in Rolling Stone

24

Comments

  • blondieblue227
    blondieblue227 Va, USA Posts: 4,509
    http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y175/blondieblue227/eddie/evRS1107.jpg


    ok, now time to actually read the article. hahaha.
    *~Pearl Jam will be blasted from speakers until morale improves~*

  • iamica
    iamica Chicago Posts: 2,628
    That was interesting, thanks.
    Chicago 2000 : Chicago 2003 : Chicago 2006 : Summerfest 2006 : Lollapalooza 2007 : Chicago 2009 : Noblesville (Indy) 2010 : PJ20 (East Troy) 2011 : Wrigley Field 2013 : Milwaukee (Yield) 2014 : Wrigley Field 2016
  • PearlJen
    PearlJen Seattle Posts: 30
    blondieblue227 wrote:
    http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y175/blondieblue227/eddie/evRS1107.jpg


    ok, now time to actually read the article. hahaha.


    Article?? What article?? :)
    Thank you for taking the time!
    The smallest oceans still get . . . big, big waves
  • blondieblue227
    blondieblue227 Va, USA Posts: 4,509
    PearlJen wrote:
    Article?? What article?? :)
    Thank you for taking the time!


    hehehe.

    next time try the 'print screen' button. paste into paint.

    wow, he talked about his daughter a lot.

    (hope i don't in trouble for posting that pic)
    *~Pearl Jam will be blasted from speakers until morale improves~*

  • Pegasus
    Pegasus Posts: 3,754
    distantsun wrote:
    while my political opinions have nothing to do with me vis a vis my opinion of rolling stone, this is totally true. they cannot cover him enough since he became more vocal politically.this also goes for the whole RNR Hall of Fame establishment. it's the same people with the same agenda.
    this is stupid, he always was vocal :rolleyes:
  • brandon10
    brandon10 Posts: 1,114
    Pegasus wrote:
    this is stupid, he always was vocal :rolleyes:

    I agree 100 %. He has always been political. Think before you respond.
  • jackrabbit slim
    jackrabbit slim Posts: 565
    Pegasus wrote:
    this is stupid, he always was vocal :rolleyes:

    no you're wrong. granted eddie has always been political. but rolling stone ignored pearl jam for years. do you forget eddie wiping his ass with the rolling stone cover?
    They started the pearl jam lovefest right around the denver bushleaguer incident and the kerry campaign.
  • jackrabbit slim
    jackrabbit slim Posts: 565
    brandon10 wrote:
    I agree 100 %. He has always been political. Think before you respond.

    maybe you should and read above post.
  • Pegasus
    Pegasus Posts: 3,754
    jackrabbit slim wrote:
    no you're wrong. granted eddie has always been political. but rolling stone ignored pearl jam for years. do you forget eddie wiping his ass with the rolling stone cover?
    They started the pearl jam lovefest right around the denver bushleaguer incident and the kerry campaign.
    the wiping his ass incident was after that (last year actually).

    And he was vocal against Bush Sr already. your theory holds no water... conspiracy theory..can I bet you're a republican? :rolleyes:
  • jackrabbit slim
    jackrabbit slim Posts: 565
    Pegasus wrote:
    the wiping his ass incident was after that (last year actually).

    And he was vocal against Bush Sr already. your theory holds no water... conspiracy theory..can I bet you're a republican? :rolleyes:

    actually im indie. i've already said eddie was political, i'm not disputing this. i'm saying this is when rolling stone started to recognize this. damn.
    and as for my theory holding no water then how come eddie bashed rolling stone at the seattle concert in 2002. i heard that live with my own ears...or is it a conspiracy?
  • tie-dye lady
    tie-dye lady Posts: 305
    jackrabbit slim wrote:
    which is why rolling stone sucks, they serve their own agenda.

    Well what magazine doesn't serve their own agenda??? That's the point of a magzine...to serve your own agenda!
    Nothing divine dies. All good is eternally reproductive. The beauty of nature reforms itself in the mind, and not for barren contemplation, but for new creation. ~ Nature, Emerson
  • jackrabbit slim
    jackrabbit slim Posts: 565
    tie-dye lady wrote:
    Well what magazine doesn't serve their own agenda??? That's the point of a magzine...to serve your own agenda!

    yes this is true, but it sucks in this case because its a music magazine that tries to push its liberal views down your throat. i'd just like it to be a little more balanced. i cant take them seriously when its just automaticly democrat - good/ republican - evil. both parties have good and bad days.
  • SDHSClassof82
    SDHSClassof82 Seattle Posts: 306
    jackrabbit slim wrote:
    yes this is true, but it sucks in this case because its a music magazine that tries to push its liberal views down your throat. i'd just like it to be a little more balanced. i cant take them seriously when its just automaticly democrat - good/ republican - evil. both parties have good and bad days.


    Balance is good. I think that is achieved by seeking out media from a variety of point of views. And in the case of music and many things experiencing it for ourselves. Rolling Stone was created with the very clearly stated goal of promoting a liberal/countercultural point of view vis a vis rock and folk music, movies etc. I don't think the editors of RS would ever claim to represent the whole range of political perspectives.

    I stopped subscribing to RS when they lost their anti-establishment slant. I feel like I'm having consumerism shoved down my throat now when I pick it up. Oh that and just plain bad journalism. Their 1996 cover story was unforgivable in my book.
    “Wind in my hair, I feel part of everywhere...
    Late at night I hear the trees, they're singing with the dead...overhead...”
  • Red mosquita
    Red mosquita Posts: 518
    http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/17168320/the_rolling_stone_40th_anniversary_issue
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me...
  • blondieblue227
    blondieblue227 Va, USA Posts: 4,509
    jackrabbit slim wrote:
    yes this is true, but it sucks in this case because its a music magazine that tries to push its liberal views down your throat. i'd just like it to be a little more balanced. i cant take them seriously when its just automaticly democrat - good/ republican - evil. both parties have good and bad days.

    true. and honestly i keep that in mind when reading.
    must have a few different news sources.
    *~Pearl Jam will be blasted from speakers until morale improves~*

  • brandon10
    brandon10 Posts: 1,114
    jackrabbit slim wrote:
    no you're wrong. granted eddie has always been political. but rolling stone ignored pearl jam for years. do you forget eddie wiping his ass with the rolling stone cover?
    They started the pearl jam lovefest right around the denver bushleaguer incident and the kerry campaign.


    You have no idea what you are talking about. Are you 18? They stared a "lovefest" with pearljam in 93. And PJ were the ones that pulled back, not Rolling Stone. Listen to the lyrics to Blood. They have been ripping magazines for years. You think it's rolling stone that is the reason you have seen a little more of Ed lately, but it is Ed that is using the magazine to push his views. He is allowing himself to be seen a little more.
  • Evolution1
    Evolution1 Posts: 50
    what a beautiful picture!! WOW!! But does that mean that's only available on the internet and not print?
    "I am the first mammal to wear pants....yeah"
    6/95 -SF, CA.
    11/95 -SJ, CA.
    7/03 -Mt. View, CA.
    10/25/03 -Mt. View, CA.
    7/9/06 -LA, CA.
    7/15/06 -SF, CA.
    7/17/06 -SF, CA.
    10/22/06 -Mt. View, CA.
    12/9/06 -Honolulu, HI
    Eddie!-SC, CA. 4/5/08
    Eddie!-Berkeley. 4/7/08
    6/28/08- Mansfield, MA.
  • SDHSClassof82
    SDHSClassof82 Seattle Posts: 306
    doin'the-evolution wrote:
    interesting read... thanks:)

    i laughed about the iphone and text messaging part, made me think of all those threads about whether or not eddie is into that stuff etc haha.


    I don't see the mention of text messaging in the digital version of the article. Am I missing it? Page number?
    “Wind in my hair, I feel part of everywhere...
    Late at night I hear the trees, they're singing with the dead...overhead...”
  • Red mosquita
    Red mosquita Posts: 518
    SDHSClassof82 wrote:
    I don't see the mention of text messaging in the digital version of the article. Am I missing it? Page number?
    Page number 98.
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me...
  • Pearler
    Pearler Posts: 191
    This whole Ed in Rolling Stone caper is all just a little bit deprived for even my liking.

    He wipes his arse with the mag... then agrees to appear in it.

    They (Rolling Stone) watch as Ed publically shames their mag, then actually want to have him in it.....




    No shame whatsoever.

Categories