NME to cease print publication after 66 years - shared by Jesse Tobias

42427_tobias_nme.jpg


After 66 years - the end is nigh.
Final edition this Friday.

The Sun (as referenced above):
END OF AN ERA NME magazine to shut down after 66 YEARS – with final edition on Friday.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/57476...-after-65-years-with-final-edition-on-friday/

BBC:
Iconic NME magazine to end its weekly print edition.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/newsbeat-43318898

n603201609_291338_5120.jpg


I don't recognise much in recent editions, but an essential part of my youth.
Some very memorable Morrissey content both good and bad.

Regards,
FWD.

20180307_142250.jpg 84_NME_Cover_L311205.jpg THE_SMITHS_NME+-+7+JUNE+1986-419587.jpg 349fodz.jpg 2012-06-17_nme-8-6-85_opt.jpg mURI_temp_8f49e2db.jpg 51416.jpgflirting.jpg

(apologies about the tenuous link to the main story, it was the first place I saw it).
 
Last edited:
Mixed feelings about the NME going south. Sad because I bought it religiously every week from the age of 15 for about 15 years, so I guess it marks the passage of time in life and things we did differently back in the day, reading it cover to cover and informing our developing tastes. On the other hand they could be a snobbish lot, London hipsters you'd call them these days, looking down on the bands and their fans who they didn't favour, following trends and slavishly championing their own tastes. In his first biography former NME writer Danny Baker told a story of them not really listening to new weekly single releases, but reviewing them how they wanted to anyway just for laughs or shock value. Of course, they also badly took against Morrissey in the early 90's and hyped Finsbury Park "flag gate" beyond reason. Stuart Maconie once a senior writer on the paper recalls that there was a clear editorial edict to "get Morrissey" in that era. That episode at Finsbury Park and the NME show ponying "outrage" has entered modern mythology as Morrissey somehow holding the second Nuremberg Rally when in reality (and I was there) it was the fey bloke from the Smiths prancing around the stage in a Union Jack to bonehead Madness fans who took exception to him, not the flag and canned him off. This is still quoted today as early evidence of Morrissey's so called right wing leanings. Anyway, many hours of great reading remembered - I used to really love the London gig notices being from the frozen out north west as well as the letters, perhaps from the likes of Morrissey in his younger day, who knows?
Well, can you really blame them for asking questions about Flag Gate? Wouldn't anyone? He came on stage waving a Union Jack, in front of an audience littered with skinheads, and had a picture of two skinheads as his backdrop. Clearly his intent was to try and endear himself to an audience that he traditionally did not attract.

Whatever his goal, it was a disaster. Theaudience still thought he was a wimpy "fag" and ran him off stage, and the press took him to task afterwards for even flirting with them. Morrissey used skinhead imagery during a period in which he was speaking about nationalism. Why can't those two things be mutually exclusive? Why merge them if your only intent is to be a proud Brit?

To make it worse, he refused to explain himself, and not everyone wants to play a game of Clue about your ideology.

The world isn't supposed to automatically understand Morrissey's intentions. Does Morrissey even fully understand his own intentions?
 
Well, can you really blame them for asking questions about Flag Gate? Wouldn't anyone? He came on stage waving a Union Jack, in front of an audience littered with skinheads, and had a picture of two skinheads as his backdrop. Clearly his intent was to try and endear himself to an audience that he traditionally did not attract.

Whatever his goal, it was a disaster. Theaudience still thought he was a wimpy "fag" and ran him off stage, and the press took him to task afterwards for even flirting with them. Morrissey used skinhead imagery during a period in which he was speaking about nationalism. Why can't those two things be mutually exclusive? Why merge them if your only intent is to be a proud Brit?

To make it worse, he refused to explain himself, and not everyone wants to play a game of Clue about your ideology.

The world isn't supposed to automatically understand Morrissey's intentions. Does Morrissey even fully understand his own intentions?
He was booed offstage by anything but a skinhead crowd. Please get your facts straight. That story has changed more than most stories out there.
I made my own t-shirt print with that picture on it cause it is the coolest picture of everyone out there.
 
ahhh my youth,quick look at a nudey mag,quick look at the nme,another quick look at the nudey mag,quick look at melody maker,finally last look at a nudey mag,then kicked out the shop.wonderful days oh how I miss them.
You're the reason they went broke!
 
Well, can you really blame them for asking questions about Flag Gate? Wouldn't anyone? He came on stage waving a Union Jack, in front of an audience littered with skinheads, and had a picture of two skinheads as his backdrop. Clearly his intent was to try and endear himself to an audience that he traditionally did not attract.

Whatever his goal, it was a disaster. Theaudience still thought he was a wimpy "fag" and ran him off stage, and the press took him to task afterwards for even flirting with them. Morrissey used skinhead imagery during a period in which he was speaking about nationalism. Why can't those two things be mutually exclusive? Why merge them if your only intent is to be a proud Brit?

To make it worse, he refused to explain himself, and not everyone wants to play a game of Clue about your ideology.

The world isn't supposed to automatically understand Morrissey's intentions. Does Morrissey even fully understand his own intentions?
Of course "we can't really know" (thank you Ketamine Sun, in advance) but I think Morrissey wanted to put some ideas and images out there and let people make their own interpretations. He usually winds up denying everything anyway. He is two people. One of them is the singer who wants to be a pop star and have "guaranteed number one" hit records. The other one wants the readers of the Daily Mail to choke on their Weetabix over his latest outrage. This one is less interested in selling records and just wants to be a public figure, famous for something he said. Sometimes the second one defeats the goals of the first one.
 
Oh Urbanus, you do mix me up! You can be nice to homosexuals but then horrible to black people! I don't know whether to love you or despise you!
 
Whether the NME were proved right or wrong in their vilification of Moz after Madstock, the fact remains that the story itself was a classic tabloid-style hatchet job:

Take two unconnected facts (he waved a Union Flag; he sang a song called National Front Disco)
Bolt them together with utter disgregard for the truth ("He waved a Union Flag while singing National Front Disco")
Job done (who cares that it's not true? No one's gonna catch us out anyway. It's not like 25 years from now there'll be this thing called Youtube where everyone will be able to see that the story was bullshit. Oh....)
 
Mixed feelings about the NME going south. Sad because I bought it religiously every week from the age of 15 for about 15 years, so I guess it marks the passage of time in life and things we did differently back in the day, reading it cover to cover and informing our developing tastes. On the other hand they could be a snobbish lot, London hipsters you'd call them these days, looking down on the bands and their fans who they didn't favour, following trends and slavishly championing their own tastes. In his first biography former NME writer Danny Baker told a story of them not really listening to new weekly single releases, but reviewing them how they wanted to anyway just for laughs or shock value. Of course, they also badly took against Morrissey in the early 90's and hyped Finsbury Park "flag gate" beyond reason. Stuart Maconie once a senior writer on the paper recalls that there was a clear editorial edict to "get Morrissey" in that era. That episode at Finsbury Park and the NME show ponying "outrage" has entered modern mythology as Morrissey somehow holding the second Nuremberg Rally when in reality (and I was there) it was the fey bloke from the Smiths prancing around the stage in a Union Jack to bonehead Madness fans who took exception to him, not the flag and canned him off. This is still quoted today as early evidence of Morrissey's so called right wing leanings. Anyway, many hours of great reading remembered - I used to really love the London gig notices being from the frozen out north west as well as the letters, perhaps from the likes of Morrissey in his younger day, who knows?
Apropos of nothing, that Danny Baker autobiog is hilarious.
 
Well, can you really blame them for asking questions about Flag Gate? Wouldn't anyone? He came on stage waving a Union Jack, in front of an audience littered with skinheads, and had a picture of two skinheads as his backdrop. Clearly his intent was to try and endear himself to an audience that he traditionally did not attract.

Whatever his goal, it was a disaster. Theaudience still thought he was a wimpy "fag" and ran him off stage, and the press took him to task afterwards for even flirting with them. Morrissey used skinhead imagery during a period in which he was speaking about nationalism. Why can't those two things be mutually exclusive? Why merge them if your only intent is to be a proud Brit?

To make it worse, he refused to explain himself, and not everyone wants to play a game of Clue about your ideology.

The world isn't supposed to automatically understand Morrissey's intentions. Does Morrissey even fully understand his own intentions?

Asking questions would have been perfectly natural, but let's not forget that Stuart Maconie (an insider) has admitted that there were people within the NME who hated Morrissey and were waiting for any opportunity to stick the knife in. They weren't just asking questions. The aim was to finish Morrissey off and it very nearly worked.
 
The Daily Mash 'quote' Morrissey here about the NME's demise.

Morrissey, international twat

I disdain and abhor the NME. They betrayed me, and betrayed their readers, in the 00s when they chose to hype those raucous roaring boys The Strokes instead of the real roots movement galvanising the youth of the day, which was UKIP.


http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/media/the-nme-remembered-by-various-wankers-20180308145524
I particularly like:

"Emma Bradford, Guardian columnist

For a teenager growing up in the suffocating boredom of suburbia the NME offered an escape into a more exciting world, which is an incredibly fascinating insight no one has ever had about music before. I am great."

Although I have to admit, 'International Twat' is pretty funny.
 
I particularly like:

"Emma Bradford, Guardian columnist

For a teenager growing up in the suffocating boredom of suburbia the NME offered an escape into a more exciting world, which is an incredibly fascinating insight no one has ever had about music before. I am great."

Although I have to admit, 'International Twat' is pretty funny.

Piece is on point concerning most of the contributors
 
Asking questions would have been perfectly natural, but let's not forget that Stuart Maconie (an insider) has admitted that there were people within the NME who hated Morrissey and were waiting for any opportunity to stick the knife in. They weren't just asking questions. The aim was to finish Morrissey off and it very nearly worked.

Yeah, but the motivation from hatred can often come in handy when revealing valid controversies.

I think it was Morrissey's refusal to clarify or provide nuance to his escalating imagery, and comments that was the breaking point.

When you play that game with the press, they're going to go down their own alley if you don't defend yourself. This is why celebrities have publicists to counsel them, and head off controversies. They know the dance, and the power the media has.

Morrissey thinks its beneath him to defend himself; as if he's giving in. Plus, he enjoys the cat, and mouse power play that being coy provides. Still, the media knows he's playing a game with them, and if you want to play the game, then prepare to be pressed and baited, just like you do. Refusing to clarify rarely works out. Morrissey's career lost a lot of momentum, and good will at the end of that period that lasted quite a while.

Morrissey played a game that he did not have the power to be playing because he knew he was a Brit pop darling, and he had got away with so much before. This was just a culmination of the line stretching that he was used to profiting from. The media had enough, and demanded he explain himself, and he refused.

If you think about it, Morrissey is basically the Donal Trump of pop. He speaks flippantly about important topics; claims there are conspiracies against him; holds strict nationalistic stances, and manages to always destroy whatever momentum he has gained at the moment.

It's a kind of self-sabotage that sustains the persecution complex that we all know is purely about ego. If you don't have enemies, then you don't get attention.

Cluster B Perosnalities.
 
Well, can you really blame them for asking questions about Flag Gate? Wouldn't anyone? He came on stage waving a Union Jack, in front of an audience littered with skinheads, and had a picture of two skinheads as his backdrop. Clearly his intent was to try and endear himself to an audience that he traditionally did not attract.

Whatever his goal, it was a disaster. Theaudience still thought he was a wimpy "fag" and ran him off stage, and the press took him to task afterwards for even flirting with them. Morrissey used skinhead imagery during a period in which he was speaking about nationalism. Why can't those two things be mutually exclusive? Why merge them if your only intent is to be a proud Brit?

To make it worse, he refused to explain himself, and not everyone wants to play a game of Clue about your ideology.

The world isn't supposed to automatically understand Morrissey's intentions. Does Morrissey even fully understand his own intentions?

The irony is, as many many people have noted, that if you fast forward a couple of years to the Britpop era then the flag is unapologetically and unironically everywhere, on magazine covers, worn by the Spice Girls, etc, etc. Only Morrissey it seems received such seismic criticism for using it briefly as an onstage prop.
 
The irony is, as many many people have noted, that if you fast forward a couple of years to the Britpop era then the flag is unapologetically and unironically everywhere, on magazine covers, worn by the Spice Girls, etc, etc. Only Morrissey it seems received such seismic criticism for using it briefly as an onstage prop.

I was gonna say the same. Even a few years later it was used in the nme by the libertines
 
The irony is, as many many people have noted, that if you fast forward a couple of years to the Britpop era then the flag is unapologetically and unironically everywhere, on magazine covers, worn by the Spice Girls, etc, etc. Only Morrissey it seems received such seismic criticism for using it briefly as an onstage prop.

Course, it's the skinhead thing that makes it not the same, though, isn't it.
 

Was he not being sarcastic when he said "I'm not at all excited about this personally"?? It sounded like a joke to me.
Although Moz did say 'thanks to Q for supporting me right now'. If that's not a dig I don't know what is.
 
Considering Morrissey's recent comments, the NME was proven right regarding their suspicions about him. This was at a time when Morrissey was being much more coy about his comments, and refused to explain himself.

I think a lot of people on here owe them an apology.

Who's going to be first to swallow their pride?
Pity there isn't an emoticon here for 'WTF?'. Why would MOZ or anyone ever apologise to a rag-mag that makes money either praising or slandering you?
 
Yeah, but the motivation from hatred can often come in handy when revealing valid controversies.

I think it was Morrissey's refusal to clarify or provide nuance to his escalating imagery, and comments that was the breaking point.

When you play that game with the press, they're going to go down their own alley if you don't defend yourself. This is why celebrities have publicists to counsel them, and head off controversies. They know the dance, and the power the media has.

Morrissey thinks its beneath him to defend himself; as if he's giving in. Plus, he enjoys the cat, and mouse power play that being coy provides. Still, the media knows he's playing a game with them, and if you want to play the game, then prepare to be pressed and baited, just like you do. Refusing to clarify rarely works out. Morrissey's career lost a lot of momentum, and good will at the end of that period that lasted quite a while.

Morrissey played a game that he did not have the power to be playing because he knew he was a Brit pop darling, and he had got away with so much before. This was just a culmination of the line stretching that he was used to profiting from. The media had enough, and demanded he explain himself, and he refused.

If you think about it, Morrissey is basically the Donal Trump of pop. He speaks flippantly about important topics; claims there are conspiracies against him; holds strict nationalistic stances, and manages to always destroy whatever momentum he has gained at the moment.

It's a kind of self-sabotage that sustains the persecution complex that we all know is purely about ego. If you don't have enemies, then you don't get attention.

Cluster B Perosnalities.

I don't think so in that instance.

Remember when We Hate it was released that the NME review stated, "Moz is history, and we'd all do well to learn it." And this was from one of the more mild mannered writers.

If you went back and read some of the stuff written around that time, I think it would show that no comment from Morrissey would have helped back then.
 

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom