welcome to the blog!

I get around the cover artist issue by subscribing :-D

as for what I'd change - I generally love everything about the magazine, but I'd like to see something else instead of 99% True. I think it's run its course in terms of subject matter, and I don't even enjoy spotting the odd fact out. First thing I do is read what the answer is, and *then* I read the facts themselves!

99% true is first thing I read

the answer to the question of course is more record reviews.

Hey fatMark

I'm fairly new here myself. Totally agree with you.

I think the Word is the best magazine in the world. Its coverage of books, films, threads of popular culture, the Best/Worst, the humour, the standard of journalism are all absolutely top notch. But the music policy does have a terrible inclination toward Dadrock. I once described it as "a hip Oldie".

There are many people who grew up not listening to James Taylor, Van Morrison, Paul Simon etc who are not catered for. (Mojo is a tedious read.) The first time I bought the Word there was a brilliant article by, I think, Rob Fitzpatrick, attacking all the Woodstock anniversary rubbish - aha! An opinionated counterblast - I like it! I think that editorially there is a freshness to the Word - it can be more subjective than other magazines, and I like that. It has introduced me to lots of great books, films, and writers.

Basically, I like it all, apart from the prevailing music policy. In an ideal world it would cover more artists beyond the Dadrock theocracy. Sure, you get the occasional artist under 40, but a lot are the new classicists - Fleet Foxes, the execrable CW Stoneking (even Australians don't rate him, and they love anything homegrown) etc, and the new beard generation. David Hepworth thinks the best year for music was 1971. That's his opinion, but not one I'd agree with. I'd like to read about, oh, off the top of my head, Francois Hardy, Chuck Willis, Funkadelic, Orange Juice, Buzzcocks, Staple Singers, Krautrock, Human League, Roland Kirk, Jarvis Cocker (who was once on a cover, but may as well not have been) and, oh many more.

Thing is, it appears when they do try & break out of the Dadrock arena, no-one buys it. They put Dido on the cover once and it remained unsold - but, Jesus, Dido! I mean, if that's what they think the younger demographic want to read about, what did they expect?

I think more people would buy it if they moved away from the Men with Beards and tried a new music policy. But the existing demographic don't seem to buy it if they try. So I can understand why it is as it is.

My advice? Carry it in a plain brown paper bag, and accept that overall it is still the best magazine around, and contribute to the blog as much as you can. You can get into some right barney's with some people, and find warm support from others.

hiding your copy of The Word inside a copy of Razzle?

....is that if you changed the one thing that people don't like about them then they'd suddenly like them more.

I like the page at the back, where Andrew Harrison, Fraser, Ms Mossman, the Incredible Heppo and one Special Guest keep us up to date with their current favourites in terms of music, books, films, TV, etc. I've picked up a lot of jolly tips from there. Don't ever get rid of it!

... What I'd change? I find some of the one page comment pieces a bit self serving but as a whole I love the mag/ blog /CD / podcast combo which makes the whole proposition something where you're bound to find something. Any old rubbish gets forgiven in return for a Roy Harper interview.

... gets coat...

that I have absolutely no interest in reading about pop music anymore and so, for the first time, my subscriber issue for this month went to the recycling still in it's plastic cover.

Is the plastic cover recyclable?

Hell, you've got me worried now.

103 (count 'em) issues and still Supertramp haven't graced the cover. I mean really...

You forgot to say "hi to everybody who knows me".

I'd change nowt about the mag, except perhaps the brand of Satan's Snot that holds the CD to the cover.

.....in 2011 you're as likely to get a 'heritage' act on the cover of the NME than Record Collector.
Who'd have thought?

If you put lesser known, lesser appreciated artists on the cover you will generally get fewer sales, I reckon. You get fewer sales you get less revenue and then less money to spend on quality writers. It's a trade off that I can live with to ensure it stays on the stands with the excellent content.

But this is all speculation as I have never worked in publishing.

Please include more of the stuff I like and less of the stuff I don't like.

Needs more hip hop. Or Cowbell.

I think its time Roots Manuva had a cover. He's got new stuff coming out soon and is a bit of an office fave, and he's got a beard.

Yes Word team, you can thank me when it sells a million...

featuring Everything Everything,Dutch Uncles and Field Music just a thought/opinion

The previous issue, with Brett Anderson on the cover, seemed to have been designed for me: Suede, They Might Be Giants, Stewart Lee all current/long-held obsessions and all fascinating articles. I was even intrigued by the Blair interview, as it seemed quite a coup for that series of articles.

As a subscriber I don't particularly care about the cover, but I thought the Brett pic was excellent, and I'd have definitely been attracted to the magazine if I'd seen it in a newsagent. That said, I can't see 90's icons and content filling too many more issues - while I'd be more than happy to buy a magazine with Carl Puttnam from Cud on the cover and in-depth interviews with Matt Johnson and Loz from Kingmaker, I suspect I'm the only one. (Though can we ACTUALLY have a Matt Johnson article pleeeease?)

It's small but selective, and there have been a number of instances of reviews there prompting me to investigate artists further. It helps that a lot of them seem to be on emusic. The most recent example is the new Charlie Dore album, which David Hepworth gave a thumbs up to in the last but one issue. It's a safe bet that I wouldn't have checked it out otherwise, and I'm glad I did because it's wonderful.

... Joe Muggs to get a new faceshot (or Muggshot?) - what the fuck is all that about?

I reckon that it would be the same for any magazine you could name. You like some but never all. I subscribe to The Word and no other magazine. I don't necessarily have an interest in all the pages of it, but I don't expect to. It covers a broad range of topics intelligently and encourages debate. I don't really want to be asked about what I like and don't like as this smacks of the focus group decision making process. What I want is a clear vision of what the magazine is and what it delivers and I either buy it or not on that basis. Keep up the good work Mr Ellen & Mr Hepworth.

99% True is a great feature!

More review though if you don't mind. The long kind.

"behind the scenes" stuff such as the EMI piece this month. I'd like to see a series of pieces about touring, from 4 blokes in a Transit to huge tours. The technology now is amazing and little talked about outside of trade only publications. Sound has improved beyond all recognition and video and lighting are converging with the advent of LED screens and media servers.
On the music side, I'd like to be introduced to more genuinely interesting stuff, not sure how to express it better.

More Classic Soul More Mod More Ska More Reggae More Psychedelia More Power Pop More New Wave More Post-Punk...if you're going to do "old" how's about a bit more variety of "old"?

...we've heard all the stories about Rick Wakeman eating curries during bass solos and Bill Bruford's electronic drum kit not working and all the rest of it. It's time the spotlight of absurdity and hubris was pointed at the post prog acts. Starting, I suggest, with Sham 69...

I will *Cub's Honour* renew my subscription ad finitum for one, yes just ONE, cover with Ocean Colour Scene.

New Wave
Rock behind the Iron Curtain
What they were grooving to in say, Thailand or Sweden in the 60s
A really long feature on pop TV, featuring the likes of Razzmatazz and Supersonic, etc.
Glam, glam and more glam
More along the junk shop singles line
Love the first person experiences, and really enjoyed David Hepworth's Whistle Test one

That'll do for now.

...that'd be a great reason to get Chris Charlesworth to do a 'first person' thing, in whatever that slot at the back is called (Hep on OGWT, Shaar Murray on Oz etc). He was The Man for Who & Slade coverage back in the day and wrote a very fine, long out of print, Slade pictorial biog in the 80s. Lovely bloke, too.

I like the way it tastes. Mojo tastes of old farts. Word tastes of crunchy Cox's Pippins.

... There used to be a radio column & a tv one that I enjoyed. But they were axed a while back.

Ideally, each review should take up 50 per cent of the magazine. So, er, two reviews.

there's much more variety in the world of popular music than is generally suggested in the pages of Word. On the rare occasion that something more exotic/unexpected is reviewed (eg Siamese 70s pop, Burial, reggae compilations) I've usually bought it and not regretted it.

As has been mentioned frequently, all possible permutations of earnest white guys with guitars have been exhausted. As has also been mentioned by the Massive just as frequently, however, is our keen interest in music from further afield (physically and chronologically).

But keep all the non music stuff - it's often the most interesting.

...is mainly that they are just too old fashioned. It's not just the choice of pictures, its the design! The whole design ethic is from somewhere roughly late 70's to mid 80's. The Word logo in particular is from a different era. I realise it's possibly supposed to be "retro", but it just doesn't work. More clarity and simplicity in the design, and you would erm ...be able to get away with shots of old stars who haven't been in the public consciousness for 20 years.

The 14th Springsteen cover recently, was just completely ridiculous. No one in their right minds would buy that from an ...attractive and well blessed 25 year old shop assistant.

the content, the cover or any of all that stuff. The only criticism I could give is it's so bloody hard to find! I'm usually shocked when I see it in a supermarket or even newsagent. WH Smiths seems to be the only reliable outlet that stocks it and it's a shop I hate on principle. The reasons are many but here's my top 3:
1. Constantly trying to get you to buy a huge bar of chocolate for a quid when you buy a magazine.
2. Wopping a random extra 50p on their cigarettes for no other reason than being unspeakable ****s.
3. The sheer hypocrisy of putting coy little bags around their porn mags but selling them anyway. Not having bought the latest Razzle from WH Smiths I'm not aware if they try to get you to buy a huge bar of chocolate to accompany your porn. Tempted to try just to see what happens, but I'm not sure if I'd be able to keep a straight face.

Er, rambled a bit there...Word Magazine? *sits down at piano*
"Don't go trying some new fashion
Don't change the color of your hair
You always have my unspoken passion
Although I might not seem to care
I don't want clever conversation
I never want to work that hard..."

Its hidden on the shelf below "Attitude" so when searching you look like you're being furtive. Hence the fact I now subscribe as it is hard to find anywhere. Anyway as for the magazine itself the only major complaint is that the CD should reflect the content of the magazine. My life is too short for Spotify. Chocolate and porn on the other hand I feel you have an interesting business model Mr Fade!

Or possibly a sherbert dip?

Image if you will the magazines are split into 3 levels. Each level has 3 sections. The Word is the upper section of the lower level. Therefore you have to crouch down to see it. You spot all the other music mags more easily, including the M*J* with the 2 different free Pink Floyd cover CDs. Yes I used to be tempted once until I realised they only got played once then cast adrift into the *collection*.

Now The Word covers several different sections of the lower level. You can thank me by placing Stackridge on the cover. The bass player Crun has cultured a magnificent beard just for the occasion.

with the constant parade of usual suspects featured/on the cover of the monthly music mags, as I don't think they will change. But i do wonder how long Mojo and Uncut can go on peddling the same old stuff, ignoring anything post 1976.

I actually think they are getting worse, I had high hopes for Mojo as it started the year quite well, but the last 4/5 issues have been dull, dull dull. As for Uncut, i've not bought an issue this year. This is from someone who religously bought every monthly mag! It's getting to the point where i'm considering cancelling my sub to Mojo, such is its yawn inducing content recently.

Surely there must be a time when mag editors change, become younger, and cater for a readership that didnt grow up with The Beatles/ The Who/Pink Floyd/Neil Young et al, and find the prospect of yet another solo Beatles feature distinctly underwhelming.

Been a bit disappointed to see Word go down the 'Dad Rock Cover' road recently, who can forget the Iggy Pop and Robert Wyatt covers of yore, pretty brave really. But i guess these heritage act covers sell copies of mags?

As for changes to The Word, would like to see the mag change to become a combination of the much missed Plan B mag and early Uncut, but that won't happen, so am happy with the word as it is, an entertaining, intelligent read covering entertainment in all its forms.

Oh, welcome to the group Mark

all non-traditionalist 'rock' is ignored by most large music publications, as there is no star power to sell magazines. Which I suppose is why the folks at Classic Rock started their prog rock offshoot, to cater to the small but dedicated prog audience.

For the first time in years I'm going to have to buy Word in a shop because I think the next issue is my last on subscription. It's not that I'll stop buying it it's just that somehow, the urgency to renew just never struck me this year, but I probably will get round to it eventually.

I've enjoyed some of the reminiscence/insights/longer articles in recent months but get a bit cross when these just turn out to be book tie-ins eg Stuart Maconie. I'm a bit bored with 99% True because I think they're reaching the end of their ideas - similarly Best and Worst - most of the time these days I don't even know who the people/characters are eg superheroes. I've always been a bit cross with the waste of space near the front of 2 pages of photo and one tiny box of text. It's reminiscent of the glossy women's mags that are 25% full of adverts. It wouldn't bother me if there was no CD either - I try to listen but mostly find the tracks rather dull
and worthy. Similarly, I read the interviews and features but they rarely feature any musicians that I'm really passionate about.

But there's still more to interest me than there is in most magazines so I'm sure I'll still be sticking around.

In the days of punk, dayglo was everywhere - particularly as the colour of choice for fanzines and record covers. I wore dayglo socks well into adulthood. I would love to see a Word special on punk - with a dayglo cover.

It would, at least, be easy to spot on the shelves.

are dependent on subscribers and on casual browsers in newsagents. Subscribers are mostly casual browsers who have enjoyed reading the mag enough times to want to get it every month.
Casual browsers are attracted firstly by what's on the cover. Once a magazine finds a style of cover that consistently sells to casual browsers and to subscribers, they generally stick to it and refine/refresh it every now and then to try and pick up the numbers while stopping the regulars getting bored.
Drastic changes are generally seen (quite rightly) as a bad thing because they upset subscribers but occasional well-executed "freshen-ups" can make the mag stand out to the browsers who've seen it on the stands but not been previously tempted.

Personally, I'm not sure there's a market anymore for a magazine that's focussed purely on the brand new in music etc. For that you'd need to persuade the twenty-somethings to buy it and I don't think, as a demographic, they're interested much in magazines.

You could try Heat or Nuts.

If you stay around here long enough you might get to appreciate Mr Thompson, Mr Waits, Mr Costello and Mr McCartney. Yes, they are all dads - any problem with that? It keeps the World going round you know.

Point Number 1
Love the magazine?
Then subscribe. Your magazine needs you!
Well what it really needs is your money but I am sure you get the jist...

Point number 2
It ain't broke so don't fix it.

I have lost count of the number of magazines I have stopped reading after they were "improved"

No, I'm not suggesting that the Massive write the magazine but a rolling list of suggestions for features could be useful ... Instead of the small number of folk at Word Towers - plus the associated freelancers - coming up with ways to fill the mag in the months ahead, a bigger pool of ideas would surely come in handy?

Oh and if Rhodri Marsden always looks like he does in that pic up with the 'New podcast: 40 noises and lousy first dates with Rhodri Marsden' post - bloody miserable in other words - then it's no wonder his first dates go pear shaped. Give us a smile Rhod :-)

No subscription renewal.

I'm waiting.

I know Adele was on the last one, but having NG on the front, the Simon Cowell of rock (I have always been the same, I will always be the same forever and ever and ever...) is one hell of a mea culpa.

"We had Adele on the last one. I know she was tucked away in the corner next to a couple of bona fide dead blokes, but... don't *young people* like Adele? What we need for the next one is a real reactionary crust..."

A more enticing cover would be "Noel shuts up, forever".

Sorry. I'm sure the mag's up to the usual standard

....has to be the Sid Vicious Record Collector job about five years ago.
Ended my buying of the mag after 25 years, and I had to apologize profusely to my local newsagent.