I can remember when the ForeWord consisted of more words than pictures.... "At last! Something to read!", indeed.

And nobody is forcing you at knifepoint to download the FREE podcasts are they?

Pretty simple solution really.

having a dig at 'the word'! Is there something going on that I don't know about?

.. I can't agree about the podcasts.

At the end of the day the podcasts primarly are about some blokes in a room talking bollocks about music and they regularly go off on tangents.

Just like the conversations I gave with my mates in the pub. Except there's probably less swearing. That's why I like them.

I have suggested in another blog topic that I would like to hear more about the workings of the music buisness. That's purely selfish on my part because I want to know more about it. If it doesn't happen then I won't lose sleep, I'll still carry on listening. If they didn't happen or they became more structured then I'd be miffed (but would still listen !)

I've enjoyed the last few months just as much as ever.

I'm not a media Islington type, honest. and I definitely don't have a manbag.

I came here for an arguement....

The reason Mr Ellen doesn't appear on the podcast as much as you'd like (and we'd all like him to appear more often), is that he's actually spending more time working on/writing for the magazine. As for Home Service, the limited amount of research we've done suggests that it's often the first thing people turn to, so I suspect that's staying, at least for the time being - not that we expect everyone to like it.

Regarding Twitter, I'm sorry it's of no interest to you, but its use really isn't limited to a small area of London, and none of us own a manbag as far as I know. Either way, I don't believe there's been any coverage of it in the last couple of issues (I haven't checked, so I'm happy to be proved wrong).

Welcome to the website.

but if it means he writes more articles then that's a price I'm willing to pay. The Twitter stuff isn't that interesting to me, nor was the Jade Goody obituary, but I don't mind that stuff being featured at all - if it has to enter my world then it might as well be through decent journalism. That aside, I don't seem to be enjoying the mag as much in the last few months either. And I know this has been covered elsewhere in other posts, but for me the Word has ultimately seemed somehow thinner since the loss of 'Word of Mouth', which was always the first section of the magazine I turned to and simply perfect for reading on the bus or the train. It was the kind of thing that made Word magazine a joy to discover. Bring it back (along with the HORA!) Pretty, pretty please...

...but it's not me. I'm still a big fan.

ps NFI (Not From Islington).

I'm another one who misses it, it was also the first section I turned to when travelling to work (bit of a bugger driving the car at the same time though). By the by, I've got a manbag and they're great (and no I am not from Islington).

Just realised that I've got a manbag and I tweet from my iPhone...

That said, I still enjoyed the mag when the above wasn't the case.

for a magazine with such a small staff, how come none of them ever - or rarely- seem to write for it!
are they all busy 'editing' 24/7 ?! I think we should be told.
this is quite addictive isn't it.

manbag as mine got broke at the weekend. It saves my strides from looking gash by holding coins, wallet, keys & phone (SonyEricsson not iPhone). It also holds nappies & wipes when I'm left in charge of the nipper and Cds & 7"records when they're foisted upon me by crap local musicians at gigs. Clearly I am a terrible shit and should work in the media.

the manbag - mine's a lovely dark brown faux leather Dunlop model, if you're interested.

Not sure if I agree about the 'zine - WOM is indeed sorely missed, but the influx of semi-new columnists like McIlheney and Smith strengthens an already strong aspect of the writing.

Agree about the absence of ME on recent podcasts; although still highly enjoyable without him, I feel that his amiable presence and infectious humour always enhances the chemistry between the participants and - don't take this the wrong way, Mr H -somewhat softens the occasionally shrill incredulous tone established by the
aforementioned Mr H.

(Was that OK, Dad?)

Word to the manbag massive: £12 laptop bag from the cutprice/ union unfriendly/ headline making German grocers.
FWIW: Heppo, Smith and especially Harrison (Toddla review was sensational)have been bang on form as has the welcome return of Barney Tabasco.
Declaring interest, Mr Du Noyer is kind enough to help me out at work from time to time - but his book is a cracker, his best yet and an important history of an important sector of popular music.

have been superb; loads of quirky articles, very inventive and some godd longer reads. If that's what Mark ellen is doing then its time well spent. He does make a difference to the podcasts though (moves them from the usual very good to the ridiculously funny) and should be encouraged to defer his lunch break once a week to take part.

I suggest you have a few months reading just Mojo, Q or Uncut. You'll soon realise that the quality of writing in The Word is in a different class.

Are you by any chance related to the author of the provocative and often amusing “Bargepole” columns which used to appear in Punch in the 1980s, railing against all change in the world?

I can’t help but think that if that column was appearing now, strong opinions on such topics as man bags and Twitter would be featuring in it.

It's useless isn't it? If a review gets a whole page then it usually a good one, but sadly only about three or four albums get this treatment. The little three paragraph reviews say nothing, which wouldn't be such a big deal if they at least had a star rating of some sort to indicate what they actually thought of it.

It's the weakest part of the magazine by a long distance, and the very worst review section in any monthly magazine. Q, Mojo and Uncut have reviews that tell me something.

I always though manbags were those things that looked like a leather toiletry bag with a short handle for dangling from the wrist. If I'm right, then I definitely don't have a manbag.

If, on the other hand, it's a shoulder bag we're talking about then I do have one. I'd like to know now, just so that if it turns out I do have one I can go and get the appropriate asymmetric haircut to go with it.

Oh yeah - the mag. To be honest, the last 2 or 3 editions are the first since I started subscribing that I haven't read from cover to cover, but I'm not certain whether it's a general dip in quality. The Bono articles a while back were just unpleasant: an extended slag-off rather than anything interesting, which was disappointing coming from a normally enthusiastic publication. But that's my only criticism, and the CDs have never been better - I think the last 3 have been excellent.

that was exactly to my taste then I'd probably be the only one reading it. I read the Word because it frequently has articles of interest to me, it's generaly well written and I like the cover CD because I don't listen to radio that much these days and so it's a good way to try out new music. However, that doesn't mean that the magazine is beyond criticism (the reviews section is poor and some editions (the Bono one in particular) seem to have too much filler).

The OP may well have run his course with The Word. I was a Q subscriber for 2-3 years but gave it up about 10 years ago because it had "nothing to say about my life". That's life and there's no need to get het up about it.

i subscribe, so i'm allowed a comment, right?

free cds a good idea - quality taken a nosedive recently

articles are usually a mix of interesting comment on culture (the wider the better for me) and pieces on bands that there has already been more than enough written about (i really don't want to read anything more about u2, the beatles, dylan etc ever again. these artists are used purely as a selling tool in my opinion - whack 'em on the cover, write stuff about them that's been said a million times, and bob's your sales-figures)

reviews ok but not varied enough, and too short

'best and worst' pages always great, controversial, funny - first page turned to

the whole thing is generally a good read, it makes me angry and makes me laugh in about equal measure, and takes me a good coupla hours to get through, which is value for cash, but i can't help feeling that it's not really 'me' - i'm almost 40, married, coupla kids, work in education, loved guitar music for ever, loved electronic music almost as long, read books like they're going outta fashion, interested in popular culture from a 'critical' perspective (ooohh, get me, etc) so i guess i'm pretty much the word demographic, and i do enjoy the mag. however, when i see the beatles on the cover, or a seven page u2 article, or another piece about some already-established, commercially successful artist, it makes me cringe.

you know what i want? i want to be challenged.

i bought a copy of wire for the frst time last week - never heard of any of the bands mentoned, their review section was massive, never heard of any of the bands, the interviews were really detailed, never heard of any of the bands. i felt excluded and also, at the same time, interested, ready to be 'educated, ready to be introduced to music.

that's what the word cds used to do, but haven;t for a long time know (i find them too samey)

i guess what i'm saying is: cover a more eclectic mix, especially in terms of the electronic music (see the recent thread on that if you want proof there's a need...), introduce us to new music, rather than making us read about music we've already heard. be brave. credit us with - not only intelligence - a love of the new, the unusual, the strange.

last issue had the beatles on the cover, for f***'s sake!

we are hungry for new sounds - surprise us.

A shoulder bag is a manbag around these parts

Whilst I love Word (and the podcasts - particularly when Ellen is on - coz he's unintentionally hilarious), you are entitled to your opinion without being shot down by the brown-nosers. I'm not a Twitter person - but I accept that it is very much "the thing of the moment" and just coz I'm not into it doesn't mean it's not relevant. I did like the "Word of Mouth" bit - but, clearly, it's not that popular with the majority. My one gripe - I wish the book review bit was a bit bigger - and the brown-nosers on this blog who like to virtually (as in "not really", not "nearly") felate the Word staff.

bring back Word of Mouth but get (more) contributions from readers/subscribers. I'm not interested in what Victoria Coren etc is listening to, or what brother Giles has in his manbag but, based on contributions on this blog, would be keen to hear recommendations from Backwards 7, Archie, Patrick, Vulpes, Retropath et al.

I'd be quite happy to read CD reviews by any of these people too ... out-sourcing, it's the way forward.

Otherwise, as you were.

P.S. If you want shoddy journalism check out this month's Uncut. The gratutituous Beatles feature is one of the weakest items I have ever read in any music magazine, ever.

I occasionally buy Uncut and Mojo as well, and read them all the way through till I get to the review sections (about a third of the mags or seems like it). At that point I read maybe three reviews and skim through the rest. The live reviews I skip altogether Seems a waste of 30-40 pages. I think the Word should go back to doing decent-length reviews of 3 or 4 records a month and ignoring the rest. A half-column review is neither fish nor fowl. And I'd welcome more book reviews - not just newly-published books, but articles on favourite fiction, history etc.
And I think that anyone, even a first-time poster, has the right to express an opinion.

the recent Beatles article. It was nice to read some different perspectives, particularly given the scraping of Beatles barrels round at Uncut towers lately. If there's to be more on the Fabs, why not have some interviews with some people who you rarely hear from in the media? An interview with Mark Lewisohn about his upcoming three-volume Beatles biography would be interesting. And I'm sure I remember hearing Mark Ellen in one of the podcasts saying he'd love to interview Brian Matthew. Unless that's already featured (I'm only a recent subscriber), that'd be great to see. Similarly, Michael Gray speaks really well about Dylan, but his work seems to get very little press coverage. His recent speaking tours were great and full of new (to me) information, so there is the potential for a great lengthy Word interview there too.

I believe the strength of the magazine, and associated stuff (Podcast etc), is its diversity - not just musically, but culturally in general.
An article about the Beatles is just as valid as anything else produced in the last few months
Have to agree about the Reviews - would like some more (Music, DVD, Films) but not to the extent of those mags mentioned above

the issue with Jarvis Cocker on the front, when his contribution was about 2 sentences, I've always really enjoyed the mag, intelligent, mature and funny, what more could you want?

for no constructive suggestions, so bargepole urges you to consider theses musings:
give us a rest from beatles, dylan ,et al
improve radically the reviews section, maybe fewer and lengthier reviews of albums, dvds and books.
ditch interviews with the victoria corens, sandi toksvigs etc - i'm sure they're fine upstanding members of society, but i don't think they're relevant to the mag
cut down the obsession with american tv
lose lightweights like andrew collins - more from, for example, the criminally underused stuart maconie or the old warhorse charles shaar murray
get mark ellen to contribute an article each month, and to spare an hour for the podcast say 3 weeks out of 4 - we'll let him off with press week!
by the way , i also subscribe to mojo, but long ago gave up on Q and uncut!
over to the massive!

and usually get Uncut. Mojo is often very good, Uncut is often very poor.

Think the reason why people here are quite passionate and care about the Word, is this here blog. Have been on other mags blogs, and they are frankly crap. There is a real sense of community here which has developed really well, and complements the magazine well.

Was a time when the endless Beatles, Stones, Dylan covers irritated the hell out of me, doesn't so much now. Realise that these artists, esp Beatles, sell mags, and any extra sale has got to be good these days.

Have always thought the UK is well served for music mags. Not sure about other countries, but I can't imagine there are many places that have the amount of mags available, covering so many different genres. Would love to know if anyone knows different.

Agree re Maconie and Ellen, would love to see more from them both. Un/fortunately it seems that American TV is where its at, and UK TV pretty much sucks, so the obsession will continue until the situation changes. And as i said in my apology to you Bargepole, the review section is poor, it feels like something that has been tacked onto the end, as if gruffly acknowledging that as a music mag, there should be some kind of music reviews, at best really an afterthought

It's not about knowing what's new and happening,I like a good review section so I can be aware of which of the many artists I enjoy have something being released. Any mag that dropped it would no doubt suffer very quickly I would think.
Whilst Q became unreadable a long time ago I think the other three all have bits that are decent. I mainly get Word and Uncut but if they merged Word's content and Uncut's review section I would happily save myself a few quid a month.

with music sales plummeting and the whole music and magazine publishing industries seemingly in terminal decline .
how much longer can the - presumably relatively small - uk market sustain the current number of monthlies - off the top of my head, word , Q, mojo, uncut, classic rock. wonder what their respective sales figures are.
what does the much loved 'music mag of the year', which boasts 'intelligent life on planet rock' do next when planet rock itself seems on the point of burn out?
that is surely the question.
and as for the whole manbag issue, may I refer interested parties to the thread 'as the venerable lloyd cole once said'.

of breath when he sees Word becalmed near the bottom of the sales chart, although at least higher than the worryingly titled Terrorizer.
But who is buying all those copies of Uncut?

As you get older (I'm 56), your music paper/magazine changes with you. I took NME/Melody Maker in the 60's, Sounds in the 70's, Q in the eighties, Mojo/Uncut in the 90's/noughties, and now read Word.
I have found that magazines reposition themselves at certain periods to make themselves more relevant to a usually younger readership.
This certainly happened with Q in the early nineties (prior to this it was very similar to the feel of Mojo today).
Uncut did the same 2/3 years ago with a radical change to the look,feel(they made it smaller and reduced the size of the typeface) and content to such an extent that they lost me as a loyal subsciber.
Having subscribed to Mojo since it's very early days, I now find it increasingly boring and repetitive (there can only be so many rock stories!!). I did not renew my subscription.
Hey - I know that magazines need a circulation, and they must adjust to capture what they feel is a larger target readership (I am assuming this would be a 25-45 year old age group).
I don't have a problem with this (I like to listen to new music and ideas - although I am still waiting for something new and fresh to knock me musically off my feet as it did 30/40 years ago). However if the magazine does not provide the right balance it can leave some readers behind as they inevitably grow older.
Word provides the correct balance for me - it may be that two of it's editorial staff are a similar age to me. Every month I find the quality of writing exellent and it's features an interesting read, Obviously some months outshine others, but it drags me along with it and keeps me informed.
God knows what I'll be reading when I'm 60 -65 (mostly rock obituaries of my heroes I fear).

I love The Word - it's a good read, doesn't take itself too seriously and is a nice blend of modernity and nostalgia. And just to make me look an even sadder sod, I really love the podcast! I still giggle when I think about the HORA tale of Van Morrison's gob-iron and the anal cleft! Bring back the HORA! But some of the Ellen/Hepworth rambles down the lanes of musical memory do strike chords. Brilliant!

If you don't think it used to be better, it probably wasn't for you in the first place.

I ended up as a subscriber because of the podcasts. In terms fo musical coverage, my tastes rarely overlap with what the Word covers. But that doesn't really matter to me as I enjoy the breadth of coverage - so for me, more about US TV, more interviews with people like V Coren, more Andrew Collins. Like many others I got here via Q and Empire, giving up when they rebadged for a younger auidence.

It's the quality of writing that makes The Word worthwile to me. I sunscribe to Rolling Stone for the same reason, and they've all but given up on album reviews. I'm lucky in that I can afford both Record Collector and Classic Rock as well - no where near as well written, but they feed me all the news and reviews I need.

Musical tastes nowhere near the Word , a subscription
to Classic Rock meets my needs. Took out subscription
to Word as recognition of the magnificent
podcast, which I'd happily pay for, and the ongoing mental stimulation
of this site. I read about half the magazine
with real interest, the rest I can take or leave.

how well the recent Beatles cover sold, compared to other issues.

Just from looking at the amount of copies left on the shelf in my local whs, I would say pretty well

is everyone can set up their magazine and have wilco and gong on the cover and review as many lps as they like, that or use the internet or whatever. What's the point of having a dog and barking yourself ?

I have to say my heart sank when I saw the Beatles on the cover, and even though the feature was considerably better than Uncut's, that doesn't mean to say it should be encouraged. Clearly, garage forecourt man has a lot to answer for, and I sometimes wonder if he realises quite how influential he is. I'll continue to buy Uncut for Andrew Mueller and its in-depth music reviews, the occasional piece by Allan Lewis etc, although I much prefer Word. It's somewhat ironic that Word has been feted for being the best music mag, when - as others have already mentioned - one of its weakenesses is the deficiency of its music reviews. But it's the very breadth of the mag's coverage, its unwillingness to devote the majority of its coverage solely to music, the humour etc. that are its greatest strengths.

I think The Word is remarkably free of Islington manbaggery (or satchel, as we call them in the north) - it's certainly not as bad as The Guardian with its endless articles about Boris Johnson and serialisation of Robert Elms' autobiography '25 Years Of Smirking In A Pair Of Fashionable Trousers'. A few years ago they even managed to do a whole article about the meaning of chewing gum defacement on adverts in Tube stations.

I got fed up with Mojo's endless recycling of Hendrix, The Band, Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young, The Byrds articles. I like the fact that The Word features interesting people like Sandi Toksvig who don't seem to be interviewed anywhere else.

And as someone who still uses cassette players (eeh, remember them?), it's nice to have these new fads like Twitter explained without having to feel you're going to be sent to the Uncool Room for not twitting.

I would assume that there are some reading this blog who have a background in the publishing industry. There are also seems to be no shortage of decent ideas here about content.

How for would the editorial team be happy with letting the style and content be guided by the audience?