Please do not support Rolling Stone's money making scheme

[terrell]

Especially in the early days, Rolling Stone never really supported coloured singers.

However, if the book is limited edition, it might be a good ides of getting one just to sell it on when it goes out of print!

Exactly.

 

[Gonetoosoon]

Edit::

 

[Crisstti]

contributor Jon Dolan writes about Bad, Jackson’s last truly great album

That really just says it all about how useless their "tribute" will be. Bad his last truly great album?. Did they listen to Dangerous?. They don't think for themselves. They're just following the trend that after Bad (or even Thriller) he did nothing good. Or that he didn't after he "became white".

I don't think we can expect more from Rolling Stone anyway. They are just a bunch of pretentious pseudo-intellectuals (sorry to sound so angry... I actually ain't, lol, it's just that they deserve it). They hated Queen and Paul McCartney's solo career and talked garbage of them on every occasion they had.

Roger Taylor from Queen once wrote them a letter (which they published). Will try to find it. Describes them pretty well .

 

[Crisstti]

We should not question a person's character just we disagree with them. He has a right to his opinions, just like you do. Unless you know the person yourself, you should suggest they work for someone.

Frankly, I think his/her attitude begs the question. He/she comes to a Michael Jackson forum to argue that a book by a magazine that has pretty much always dissed Michael is better or at least as good and reliable as a book approved by Michael (accusing it of having lies without reading it)... and he/she pretty much called Michael a layer.

 

[Gonetoosoon]

Frankly, I think his/her attitude begs the question. He/she comes to a Michael Jackson forum to argue that a book by a magazine that has pretty much always dissed Michael is better or at least as good and reliable as a book approved by Michael (accusing it of having lies without reading it)... and he/she pretty much called Michael a layer.

Thank you.

I originally posted to apologise before but then what you said came across my mind.. I don't have anything to say sorry about.

 

[LouiseCK]

Frankly, I think his/her attitude begs the question. He/she comes to a Michael Jackson forum to argue that a book by a magazine that has pretty much always dissed Michael is better or at least as good and reliable as a book approved by Michael (accusing it of having lies without reading it)... and he/she pretty much called Michael a layer.

 

[Ramona122003]

Frankly, I think his/her attitude begs the question. He/she comes to a Michael Jackson forum to argue that a book by a magazine that has pretty much always dissed Michael is better or at least as good and reliable as a book approved by Michael (accusing it of having lies without reading it)... and he/she pretty much called Michael a layer.

I didn't mean for you tp apologize

I just wanted to keep the level of respect on the forum, even if what the person said is questionable. I just do not like when people makes assumption about other people, although I am guilty of this too sometimes, but I try my best not to.

Although, I too began to wonder about he/she when I saw the Britiny comment. So, Michael mimed in this later years, so he went to Britiney Spears level? She is a good performer, imo, but have anyone ever seen her sing/dance at the same time? I am not a follower of her, but I never seen it.

 

[Soso Deaf]

the opus is THE thing to have mj releated. u could have every magazine, every picture, every album, tencopies of every album, but w/o the opus, it's incomplete....u could have ONLY the opus and it would be complete.

 

[LoveMJackson]

the opus is THE thing to have mj releated. u could have every magazine, every picture, every album, tencopies of every album, but w/o the opus, it's incomplete....u could have ONLY the opus and it would be complete.

I like what you wrote..and I'm so excited to get the book in 2-3 weeks. Its going to be the best book ever.

 

[Memefan]

the opus is THE thing to have mj releated. u could have every magazine, every picture, every album, tencopies of every album, but w/o the opus, it's incomplete....u could have ONLY the opus and it would be complete.

:clapping::clapping::clapping:

I still don't have the coffee table to display the book yet. Darn!!!

 

[PCR]

the opus is THE thing to have mj releated. u could have every magazine, every picture, every album, tencopies of every album, but w/o the opus, it's incomplete....u could have ONLY the opus and it would be complete.

I NEED MY OPUS NOWWWWW!!!
I hope it doesn't take them years to send it to Chile... I extra paid for shipment and I want it delivered asap. The Opus and Ebony magazine. That's for me!

 

[Rockin.]

the opus is THE thing to have mj releated. u could have every magazine, every picture, every album, tencopies of every album, but w/o the opus, it's incomplete....u could have ONLY the opus and it would be complete.

can't wait for mine.

 

[Krshna28]

Three points to remember:

1.) Rolling Stone Magazine don't really support coloured singers. Elvis and Beatles are like gods to them and they consistently ignore Michael Jackson, James Brown, Chuck Berry, Louis Armstrong, Jackie Wilson and the WHOLE of MOTOWN!

2.) The OPUS cannot be propaganda as the estate has no real control as to what goes in it. They just provide the info and resources and the OPUS people decide what to do with it.

3.) If you are desperate for Michael Jackson facts and not fiction then buy three books:
a) The Visual Documentary by Adrian Grant (includes every event that happened in
his life)
b) For The Record (Every fact about every song, concert, video)
c) Moonwalk (Michael's Autobiography)

 

[Club30s]

Three points to remember:

1.) Rolling Stone Magazine don't really support coloured singers. Elvis and Beatles are like gods to them and they consistently ignore Michael Jackson, James Brown, Chuck Berry, Louis Armstrong, Jackie Wilson and the WHOLE of MOTOWN!

actually thery are VERY supportive of James Brown, Chuck Berry and other black singers as long as the 50+1% of critics have a favorable view of them look at the their greatest artist list and you will see what I mean. The are one of the most typical "cool" music magazine there is. Absolutely, inauthentic and they keep repating the same crap over and over.

3.) If you are desperate for Michael Jackson facts and not fiction then buy three books:
a) The Visual Documentary by Adrian Grant (includes every event that happened in
his life)
b) For The Record (Every fact about every song, concert, video)
c) Moonwalk (Michael's Autobiography)

Adrian Grant's book is indeed my favorite MJ book. Moonwalk is always distant and impersonal and there is somthing non-MJ about it. of course it was not written by MJ either.

In my estimation if you want to read RAW MJ and i mean RAW MJ all fans have to read "Dancing the dream". I bought that book in 92' and still cherish it more than anything. Nobody can ghost write that sh!t. It is pure from MJ's heart and the book has a VERY close-to-MJ's-heart feel than moonwalk.

For rolling stones crap see this the greatest 50 artitsts
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/5939214/the_immortals_the_first_fifty

they have MJ on NO.35! I mean on No.35! Okay say even if that was okay let us look who is above MJ. Of course elvis and beatles have to take the top 3 spots otherwise the world would stop spinning. They have artits like Beach Boys at No. 12 I mean really? really? Velvet Underground at 19? really?

This is the typical cool music safe list that you can pull out of your @ss and people still be okay with it. You know the cool music like you can always mention Beatles, Hendrix, Clapton, Stones and show you support the "greats".

If you were going by raw talent how exactly does Nirvana end up higher than Prince and MJ? on a pure musical level Prince would destroy Nirvana and I mean destroy. I believe Nirvana had good music and countless times better than some of the stuff today but better than Prince and MJ? in terms of what talent, fame, influence? how are they (stone editors) getting this? Clearly they were "stoned" when they wote this!

If you read their special that they issued after MJ's death. It was full of same shit over and over. Off the wall thriller is good and Bad (album) maybe.... nothing good after that. This is what ALL or most US music critics do. Not because MJ's stuff was not good after that because after that MJ's was not safe to talk about as clapton for example. You could risk your "critic" reputation on line if you were to God forbid say something good about MJ post dangerous.

They also said and I will quote exactly when I can find that statement in that issue...
..."by the time he appeared on the cover of thriller album his skin had lightened and nose changed". Now, where exactly is MJ's skin lighter in thriller cover? these a-holes most likely confuse the thriller cover with BAD cover and they do this kind of lame sh!t all the time.

mutherf&*kers! don't buy anything from stones.

P.S I can't recall the exact date but there was an MTV poll of greatest videos of all time in 96 or 97 and in that they placed "smells like teen spirit" as greatest video above thriller. However, later in 2000 or so when they re did it they put thriller back.

also

I still remember a picture at MTV website where they showed MJ and janet after 1993 grammys and it had the grammy "gramophone" sign all over in the back of red carpet and the picture subtitle said "MJ created news at the vma 1995 with his sister Janet" and I was like you idiots you cannot even recognize your own vma from grammys?

the point is when it comes to MJ they are highly inaccurate and unreliable. All of them and they have neglected MJ for decades so why get into it now?

 

[wednesday]

actually there are VERY supportive of James Brown, Chuck Berry and other black singers as long as the 50+1% of critics have a favorable view of them look at the their greatest artist list and you will see what I mean. The are one of the most typical "cool" music magazine there is. Absolutely, inauthentic and they keep repating the same crap over and over.



Adrian Grant's book is indeed my favorite MJ book. Moonwalk is always distant and impersonal and there is somthing non-MJ about it. of course it was not written by MJ either.

In my estimation if you want to read RAW MJ and i mean RAW MJ all fans have to read "Dancing the dream". I bought that book in 92' and still cherish it more than anything. Nobody can ghost write that sh!t. It is pure from MJ's heart and the book has a VERY close-to-MJ's-heart feel than moonwalk.

For rolling stones crap see this the greatest 50 artitsts
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/5939214/the_immortals_the_first_fifty

they have MJ on NO.35! I mean on No.35! Okay say even if that was okay let us look who is above MJ. Of course elvis and beatles have to take the top 3 spots otherwise the world would stop spinning. They have artits like Beach Boys at No. 12 I mean really? really? Velvet Underground at 19? really?

This is the typical cool music safe list that you can pull out of your @ss and people still be okay with it. You know the cool music like you can always mention Beatles, Hendrix, Clapton, Stones and show you support the "greats".

If you were going by raw talent how exactly does Nirvana end up higher than Prince and MJ? on a pure musical level Prince would destroy Nirvana and I mean destroy. I believe Nirvana had good music and countless times better than some of the stuff today but better than Prince and MJ? in terms of what talent, fame, influence? how are they (stone editors) getting this? Clearly they were "stonned" when they wote this!

If you read their special that they issued after MJ's death. It was full of same shit over and over. Off the wall thriller is good and bad maybe. nothing good after that. This is what ALL US music critics do. Not because MJ's stuff was not good after that because after that MJ's was not safe to talk about as clapton for example. You could risk your "critic" reputation on line if you were to God forbid say something good about MJ post dangerous.

They also said and I will quote exactly when I can find that statement in that issue...
by the time he appeared on the cover of thriller album his skin had lightened and nose changed". Now, where exactly is MJ's skin lighter in thriller cover? these a-holes most likely confuse the thriller cover with BAD cover and they do this kind of lame sh!t all the time.

mutherf&*kers! don't buy anything from stones.

P.S I can't recall the exact date but there was an MTV poll of greatest videos of all time in 96 or 97 and in that they placed smells like teen spirit as greatest video above thriller. However, later in 2000 or so when they re did it they put thriller back.

also

I still remember a picture at MTV website where they showed MJ and janet after 1993 grammys and it had the grammy "gramophone" sign all over in the back of red carpet and the picture subtitle said "MJ created news at the vma 1995 with his sister Janet" and I was like you idiots you cannot even recognize your own vma from grammys?

the point is when it comes to MJ they are highly inaccurate and unreliable. All of them and they have neglected MJ for decades so why get into it now?

LOVE this post!!
Accurate and so true.
I HATE this magazine and its' writers are INSANE FREAKS!!

I will never ever let any retards like the Rolling Stone Magazine's writers tell me what to think and what opinion to have about who is talented and cool.

My whole life I BURST with PRIDE saying I was a Michael Jackson fan!
You cannot compare a SINGLE MUSICIAN with Michael Jackson, NOT ONE!!!

 

[LauraLovesMJ]

Adrian Grant's book is indeed my favorite MJ book. Moonwalk is always distant and impersonal and there is somthing non-MJ about it. of course it was not written by MJ either.

Totally agree with you there. I thought Moonwalk had a cold and distant feel to it too.

In my estimation if you want to read RAW MJ and i mean RAW MJ all fans have to read "Dancing the dream". I bought that book in 92' and still cherish it more than anything. Nobody can ghost write that sh!t. It is pure from MJ's heart and the book has a VERY close-to-MJ's-heart feel than moonwalk.

Totally agree here too. I LOVE Dancing the Dream and am going to buy a couple more copies for Christmas presents. I thought the writing/feelings were extraordinary and they reminded me so much of myself when I was younger. Most of us lose that "magic" as we get older, but I don't think Michael ever did.

This is the typical cool music safe list that you can pull out of your @ss and people still be okay with it. You know the cool music like you can always mention Beatles, Hendrix, Clapton, Stones and show you support the "greats".

Sounds like they're just playing it safe. Not very ballsy for a magazine/ rock & roll culture that was supposed to be more out on the edge than that.

 

[LauraLovesMJ]

I will never ever let any retards like the Rolling Stone Magazine's writers tell me what to think and what opinion to have about who is talented and cool.

Or what to wear, or where to eat, or where to take the coolest vacations. I don't like people telling me what *I* will like, because it's silly. They can't possibly know that.

You cannot compare a SINGLE MUSICIAN with Michael Jackson, NOT ONE!!!

Exactly, and I'd say that's mostly because he was so multi-talented as well. I just don't see anyone who even comes close to comparing to him.

 

[MarielovesMJ]

actually thery are VERY supportive of James Brown, Chuck Berry and other black singers as long as the 50+1% of critics have a favorable view of them look at the their greatest artist list and you will see what I mean. The are one of the most typical "cool" music magazine there is. Absolutely, inauthentic and they keep repating the same crap over and over.

They are also supportive of I think Jimi Hendrix too, who as you said is in the "cool to like category". I think that Rolling Stone mag people are afraid of MJ. And you are right about that, I cannot stand it when some critics think that anything after Thriller is crap, when in my opinion I think that his later work is awsome. I mean Thriller is awsome but they should be reminded that his later works are sensational too