36 of them are adverts. Including about 20 pages in a row about 3/4 of the way through.
I'm not really as anti-NME some people oh here, but that is pretty poor, given that they recently reduced their weekly single reviews to 1 page.
and the enemy are also on the front.
thoughts?
another nme bashing thread!
yay!
where are my sketcherrrrrs...!
advertising doesn't work after a while...
then again girl's mags are always more advert that content....
of those pages of adverts
a large amount of them are Tour ads. Which I wouldn't want to see removed from the NME.
One of the few things that are worthwhile in there.
To be honest...
most magazines are like that with regards to adverts. Especially men's 'lifestyle' magazines.
just because everyone does it
doesn't make it right.
lemmings
for example
both
the creatures and the computer games
Why complain about it?
It's not like somebody is pointing a gun at yr head and demanding you purchase it.
NME bashing is so boring now
^
that, basically
actually
its anti NME bashing thats so boring now. Didn't you get the memo?
I used to love Wednesdays
Because I bought the NME (circa 1995). Now I love Wednesdays for the NME bashing threads.
'why complain about it'
your right NME Bbashing is boring....
but for your info i didn't buy it.
the reason to complain about it is because as britains biggest music weekly i think it has a responsibility to support new music and when i see 36 pages of adverts where there should be journalism, or when good bands don't get a review because there isn't room in the mag- it makes me sad.
that is all.
magazines need to sell dvertising space to fund themselves
deal with it. they're not a public service, they can do as they wish.
no he
has a good piont, but i think it extends well beyond the NME, the amount of ads in magazines is fuckin horrid. the amount of people that work for free for said magazines is fuckin horrid.
this is why i don't buy em.
deal with it, ok. we are, why do you think magazine sales are going down.....
some fat cats are getting pretty rich up top and we,and the product are treated like shit.
okay i will do.
your right.
I'm really sorry.
good
thank you
if you could learn how to reply to threads properly whilst you're at it, that'd be even better. ;-)
This is my thread
I'll reply how I like.
OKAY!
:-)
"My band's better than your band"
Go on, you know you want to ;)
the only reason I ever look at it is for the adverts
There's a whole page
for last weekend's Muse Wembley gigs, with a big SOLD OUT plastered over it. what, really, is the point?
Hype building.
why don't you...
write to the NME about it?
bitching about it on here won't do much.
Because if you do
they'll either
A) Not print it or
B) Print a bit of your rant and reply with the customary "We're right, your wrong, so fuck off you wanker!"
I wish...
they'd bring pulp back... that magazine had a future...
If only it would have had the room to breathe...
actually
(at least) one of the writers does occasionally peruse these boards. So bitching here might do something. Although it clearly wont
Which one?
Mark Beaumont?
James Jam
Is he rude
when he posts?
nope
he's annoyingly reasonable
is he the one with glasses
and a bald head?
he is always watching the cribs, so he must be cool-ish ;)
he likes very good music infact
generally.
bis, huggy bear and the thermals are amongst his favourites.
hes actually an alright journalist
i have found, wasted on the NME.
oooh huggy bear
:D
He's a really nice chap
I didn't know he posts on here though
Bis, huggy bear and the thermals
all suck.
zing!
i dont agree. the thermals are the best band ive discovered this year imo
I don't mean to sound like a boring nag
But shouldn't ethical reasons actually start to influence a publisher's consumption of paper? If you buy an 82 page magazine with 36 full page advertisements then it is clear that they are not taking the environmental consequences of doing so seriously. You would have thought that with heightened awareness as to the benefits of recycling practices such as this would become marginalised.
We could all make a concerted effort to improve the NME by making them aware of our concerns. Or we could not bother?
The environment can do one
as can the NME
We could just
read NME.com instead and save them the bother.
Okay
I can see this eco-posse is going to be difficult to coordinate :o)
i'm in
starting point: population control.
list of people to be sterilised:
smezzer
you can't sterilise smezzer
i'm just too potent
But in the end of the day...
they need the money more then they care about the planet.
And they could argue that as the consumer we are the ones with the reponsibilty to recycle our copy after we have read it.
not to mention that without the ad revenue
the cover price will shoot up even more
I think maybe...
...that people concerned with the environment should worry themselves with forest eating corporations like Macdonalds before they start on magazines...
you'll want to ban paper next, how will we wipe our behinds/blow our noses? On our clothes?
Nope
On your clothes.
Hey, what I was saying was all light-hearted.
No-one
who cares about the environment is light-hearted, it's common knowledge that hippies are the most violent subculture known to man.
We are one of the few cultures
that still use paper to wipe our bot-bots. Most continents use water.
wrong
we are on of the first cultures to use paper. other countries are increasingly doing the same.
i personally prefer water (with the jet spray things - not a little jug eurgh) but there you go.
oh well
i was nearly right.
But yeah, bidets = the future. Let's all get one.
i wouldn't mind paying more
for a magazine that's worth reading. at least then i'd be paying for readable content, rather than the privilege of being advertised to.
i'm not paying £1.whateveritis for the nme though, because there's little or nothing in it that merits the cover price.
36! Woah.
Last time I looked at it I also noticed the lack of reviews. 2 pages of album reviews, which is nothing really. I guess the internet beats them to the finish line in that respect.
NME will fold soon enough
until then we should all bide our time wisely and stop wasting it on complaining, it'll make the day of the magazine's demise all the sweeter.
in the late 80s
before computers or electric cars
NME used to review 30 live bands a week
and
review as many singles as warranted reviewing,
rather than squeezing it all into the one layout/format/page
I dont mingd the posters, or the faddish obsessons with the same few bands. this summer: CSS/klaxxons
but must it be at he expense of all else?
and they do cover new bands. lots of them. good ones too.
but usually only in a sentence
and then you dont hear about them
cept mebbe a live review
until they are signed to a big label and about to have a hit
it'd be nice to have some continuity...
However
They are having a redesign of the reviews pages which will mean 25 album reviews a week, rather than ...I think it's 15 on average now.