« The Stills | 2006 Tour Dates | Main | Burnside Project @ Knitting Factory, NYC | pics »
Posted in music on March 1, 2006
SPIN sells & NOT moving out of NYC
I originally posted that SPIN was moving to San Francisco after seeing the Tiny Mix Tapes article and this one, but after being taught a lesson by a commenter, talking to someone in the know, AND then finding an article in the SFGate that says "Spin will continue to be published in New York", I know they are staying right here in NYC.
The new magazine will aim for a younger audience and Gawker says, "if that 'younger version' means even more Spin covers featuring boys in eyeliner, we’ll take Rolling Stone".
---
Tags:
Posted on March 1, 2006 10:40 AM
Leave a comment
Powered by Ajax Comments
« The Stills | 2006 Tour Dates | Main | Burnside Project @ Knitting Factory, NYC | pics »
---
Comments (16)
Yea, the whole thing totally sux.
Posted by davidsavarese | March 1, 2006 11:01 AM
holy shit, that sia chick did the impossible...she fucked up a shitty magazine even more.
nice my chemical romance cover!
Posted by sam | March 1, 2006 11:13 AM
Cancelling my subscription in 5 ... 4 ... 3 ... 2 ...
Posted by musicsnobbery | March 1, 2006 11:22 AM
I was a longtime supporter of SPIN and thought it continued to be a worthwhile mag through the first half of the Oughts. But when they launched that redesign... sigh. See ya, SPIN!
Posted by bill p | March 1, 2006 11:35 AM
Is print media not dead yet? C'mon.
Posted by Anonymous | March 1, 2006 11:45 AM
Cause fucking Tiny Mix Tapes said SPIN is moving to SF that makes it so? That site is run by 18-year-olds. Try reading the articles. it says SPIN was bought by a SF based company, nowhere does it say that the content HQ is moving to SF. That's not to say that it isn't happening - though i bet on my life it isn't - but christ people. Don't extrapolate things that aren't there. Even that SF business article that says, "SPIN moving to SF" says nothing about the offices where the writers work moving to SF.
SF is a dead town, that move would effectively kill the magazine because writers would be colossally out of the loop. The new EIC knows this. Everyone knows this besides the people who can't read and the people who cluelessly reguritate and parrot the things reported by useless wannabe teen journalists.
Posted by Anonymous | March 1, 2006 12:40 PM
well, if any of you are old enough to remember when spin first came out, you'll remember how they actually had some insight full exposes on up and coming bands, not the crap that's going be purchasing a full page ad in the same issue. the mag was started with penthouse mag $$$. sweet. any hoot, it was bought by vibe and it became toilet paper after that. so maybe the new crew can bring back some cred, instead of shoveling the same old crap onto the news racks that is supposed to pass for journalism. you think??
Posted by turd polishing | March 1, 2006 12:41 PM
well, if any of you are old enough to remember when spin first came out, you'll remember how they actually had some insight full exposes on up and coming bands, not the crap that's going be purchasing a full page ad in the same issue. the mag was started with penthouse mag $$$. sweet. any hoot, it was bought by vibe and it became toilet paper after that. so maybe the new crew can bring back some cred, instead of shoveling the same old crap onto the news racks that is supposed to pass for journalism. you think??
Posted by turd polishing | March 1, 2006 12:42 PM
anonymous, you are right. They're not moving. post fixed.
Posted by brooklynvegan | March 1, 2006 12:53 PM
spin sucks
Posted by radiotinman | March 1, 2006 1:29 PM
Sorry, turd polishing, but I seriously doubt better times are ahead. Spin was my prime source of music info and knowledge between 1987 and 1995. The writing was sharp and the coverage was excellent. You could read about Sonic Youth and Pussy Galore next to a (decent) article about John Mellencamp or Prince. But that era ended. I still subscribe, but I look the magazine over after it's sat around for a couple of weeks. Sites like the one we're on provide the info (if not the context, or insight) these days. A monthly can no longer compete in terms of immediacy. An ideal monthly magazine (for a music junkie) would complement its web counterparts and feature lengthier articles about a range of artists. But that wouldn't sell to people in airports. And it sure wouldn't keep p.r. people in jobs.
I'm not sure any particular editor or publisher killed Spin. Times have just changed. The post-Guccione version tried to incorporate more than just music content. Then the magazine simplified itself and grabbed onto commercial alternative. I actually thought Sia brought some life to it for a time. Sure, the NYC starfucking was lame but the era of the Strokes/YYYs/Interpol was exciting to a lot of people. But you don't even need Fall Out Boy covers to show you that era is over now too. Good luck, Spin, whatever you turn into now.
Posted by btasc | March 1, 2006 4:11 PM
oh well, doesn't really matter where they make it. the mag is in trouble.
Posted by Can't Miss | March 1, 2006 4:38 PM
Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me, the quality of the last spin mag was Shite. There were editorial erros in several articles, like the one on the autkast movie, stating that the song Hey Yea, had been released on the speeeekerbox album, wrong. And in the Arctic monkeys review, the guy miss-quoted the lyrics from def one and maybe two of the songs. doesn't seem like a magazine on the rise
Posted by Your mom | March 1, 2006 5:28 PM
yes, your mom is right. a few issues ago, SPIN said that a picutred performer was Daddy Yankee, when it was clearly Don Omar! lo how the mighty have fallen.
Posted by reggae tone | March 1, 2006 10:02 PM
DUDES, great deals on SPIN subscriptions...ACT NOW BEFORE ITS TOO LATE.
Posted by Anonymous | March 2, 2006 10:09 AM
I cancelled my subscription the *first* time they put Michael Jackson on the cover.
Posted by thepsychicpilot | March 2, 2006 10:47 PM