|
Josh
|
 |
« on: January 18, 2005, 01:48:22 PM » |
|
Rolling Stone has rejected a Zondervan Bible ad that was scheduled to run in its next edition. *Sigh*. A sad but unsurprising choice, and further proof that Rolling Stone, in addition to being a lame magazine, hates Biblical Christianity.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
dgp11776
|
|
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2005, 02:08:15 PM » |
|
That is quite sad...but unsurprising, as you said. With all of the rubbish they do put in that magazine, I can hardly see how that ad could be even remotely offensive.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
bloop
|
|
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2005, 03:46:51 PM » |
|
To their credit, they do have Peter Travers...who probably doesn't care much for Christianity itself either, but I like him as a film critic. Oh, and David Fricke's a respectable music journalist. The saddest thing about RS remains, to me, the missed opportunity in that music reviews section. Some of the interviews and articles they've had are actually pretty good (when they land one I'm interested in hearing about anyway).
But, I agree, I don't see a good reason not to carry the ad.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 18, 2005, 03:49:07 PM by bloop »
|
Logged
|
Enjoy our pub. user/pw: thephorum Follow me on Grooveshark or Spotify. username: iceybloop |
|
|
|
Josh
|
|
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2005, 04:06:36 PM » |
|
To their credit, they do have Peter Travers...who probably doesn't care much for Christianity itself either, but I like him as a film critic. He's an excellent writer, but a great film critic? Eh... I disagree. Maybe I should move this thread from Faith to Literature... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
bloop
|
|
« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2005, 06:17:15 PM » |
|
He's an excellent writer, but a great film critic? Eh... I disagree.
Maybe I should move this thread from Faith to Literature... Well, I'm no film critic, so my general criteria = "does the guy generally agree with my take? He does! Excellent!" It's not quite that simple, but I think he's a fine film critic, if not as in-depth on the technical aspects of film as I'd probably like him to in order to call him ideal. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Enjoy our pub. user/pw: thephorum Follow me on Grooveshark or Spotify. username: iceybloop |
|
|
|
-TheWanderer-
Guest
|
|
« Reply #5 on: January 18, 2005, 09:16:03 PM » |
|
this is the same magazine that gave Ludacris 5 stars and Howie Day 2 stars...Jerkoffs
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
danny316
|
|
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2005, 12:17:16 AM » |
|
Rolling Stone has rejected a Zondervan Bible ad that was scheduled to run in its next edition. *Sigh*. A sad but unsurprising choice, and further proof that Rolling Stone, in addition to being a lame magazine, hates Biblical Christianity. Now now - I don't think this is proof of any anti-Christian conspiracy (although i'm sure some fundamentalist groups will spin it as one). The guy even said in the article that he personally didn't disagree with the message. He just said he wasn't in the business of publishing religious messages. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on pulling it - but whoever decided to put the ad in in the first place should have figured out the company's policy on religious messages before they had to pull the ad. I won't argue for RS not being lame though, lol. I just don't think this is any reason to say they "hate biblical christianity", as they really didn't have any commentary on it. Trust me, this'd be a completely different thread if the book the ad was for was the Qur'an. Being against printing religious messages in general is different than specifically hating Christianity. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Someday, Dan will make a site with nothing but pictures of amusing stolen avatars.
|
|
|
|
bloop
|
|
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2005, 05:09:37 AM » |
|
A brief moment of speculation. Reading the Bible might lead one to become a Christian. Becoming a Christian might lead one into heeding a nutcase (Jerry Falwell for instance). Jerry Falwell might lead one into not reading another Rolling Stone ever again, burning those he has in possession - so the ad would work against the fundamental purpose of any magazine, that is, to have readers and make money.
I love speculation.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Enjoy our pub. user/pw: thephorum Follow me on Grooveshark or Spotify. username: iceybloop |
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #8 on: January 20, 2005, 01:03:54 PM » |
|
I agree with Danny: this is not exactly proof that RS "hates" Biblical Christianity. However, apparently the person who made the policy decision regarding religious advertisements believed that it would hurt business. If the average RS reader would not want to see an ad by Zondervan, that doesn't say much for their readership.
My speculation regarding the thought processes of the editor(s) in question is a bit less convoluted than bloop's. I suspect it's along the lines of "we want to appeal to the modern person who has definite opinions about art and life. The people who we are targeting generally object to being preached to. If it appears that our magazine is preaching to them, even by proxy, then they may be irritated and that may influence sales or word-of-mouth advertising."
But then again, it's just speculation.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
Josh
|
|
« Reply #9 on: January 25, 2005, 10:28:27 AM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
