HI, This is indeed a fine letter, no doubt, full of real rage coming from someone who really has the right to talk like that. However, I can't help feeling surprised by people who read/pay attention to these magazines and are still shocked by seeing Britney or Shakira taking up "their place" on the cover. I mean, is someone really taking Rolling Stone seriously here? This kind of complaint sounds to me a bit like a cliché at this point and really hoping to read an in-depth article on John Zorn in Downbeat, for instance, is pretty absurd. Maybe his name will appear every once in a while, but feeling outraged because the writer didn't even try to scratch the surface is pointless. And I'd like to say "Only more serious mags like The Wire cover this kind of stuff" but I'd be also naïve, mainly because they're clever enough to dedicate one cover to Keiji Haino, another to Radiohead's Thom Yorke, another to Richard Hell and Björk in the following issue. They also want to sell and make ends meet. Trusting Rolling Stone's love of music or their criteria is too utopic for me. And of course, Britney doesn't rock at all and anyone with a bit of common sense knows that, but a lavish cleavage DOES sell magazines. Is that so surprising? Best, Efrén del VAlle n.p: Albert Ayler: "Lörrach, Paris" (hathut) _______________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger Nueva versión: Webcam, voz, y mucho más ¡Gratis! Descárgalo ya desde http://messenger.yahoo.es