You should make a point of meeting every Beatles remark with contention. Back in the Britpop days, when young whippersnappers without a clue would tell me how the Beatles were the best band ever, I would start many a night-long pub argument with a pronouncement like:
The Kinks were better than The Beatles.
I've also done this with Kraftwerk, Chic, The Smiths and Abba. And do you know what? It doesn't matter who you choose, you get the same old responses.
At first they pull a face as if you've claimed that the Goombay Dance Band were better or something, and then they go into an interminable list of "Well what about..." assertions, and you end up making more and more ridiculous claims until they realise that you're just trying to point out that there were a few more bands kicking around in the 60s, and there's been a few more since.
No need to pick the obvious ones all the time, is there?
But returning to Mojo...I've heard the argument that a familiar and big-selling cover star will increase sales, but how many of these floating voters stay on board for good, and end up buying the things that are advertised and reviewed inside the magazine?
Another frequent rant of mine is the paucity of decent music coverage aimed at older buyers across the media as a whole. I'd like to meet the teenager who can afford to spend a quarter of my annual outlay on music. So why do people think I want to read about The Beatles and Bob Dylan and the Rolling Stones? I've already bought everything I want by these people.
|
