Fleetwood Mac's Big Reunion: Rolling Stone

[michelej1]

[It's not available yet, but Rolling Stone's cover for next month mentions "Fleetwood Mac's Big Reunion" as being among the contents.]

https://tv.yahoo.com/news/rolling-st...235538478.html

http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/n...stone-20140408

[Sanne2]

They should've been ON the cover instead of inside tbh

[ironman_01701]

I think Christine McVie likes the idea of Louis-Dreyfus on the front cover. She always said that she loves to watch Seinfeld when it was running and she said she watched all of the shows. I believe it might seem like a good omen for her that Fleetwood Mac big reunion article is also mentioned with Louis-Dreyfus cover picture, bet you she had a smile on her face when she saw it.

[jbrownsjr]

Originally Posted by ironman_01701

I think Christine McVie likes the idea of Louis-Dreyfus on the front cover. She always said that she loves to watch Seinfeld when it was running and she said she watched all of the shows. I believe it might seem like a good omen for her that Fleetwood Mac big reunion article is also mentioned with Louis-Dreyfus cover picture, bet you she had a smile on her face when she saw it.

I never knew she liked Seinfeld.

[wheart]

Originally Posted by Sanne2

They should've been ON the cover instead of inside tbh

I could have bet money they would have been on the cover. Instead we get Julia Louis Druyfus. Really?

[jcalzaretta]

Rolling Stone is supposed to be about music. We know their taste is horrible. They are trying to be politcal, which they should not. Fleetwood Mac should be on the cover. Plain and simple.

[KenB]

Originally Posted by jcalzaretta

Rolling Stone is supposed to be about music. We know their taste is horrible. They are trying to be politcal, which they should not. Fleetwood Mac should be on the cover. Plain and simple.

Rolling Stone isn't "supposed" to be about anything -- it can be about whatever the publishers want it to be, and if that changes over time from music to something else, well, it's their magazine. The public is free to buy or not buy it. Also, while they do often take political stands, the Julia Louis-Dreyfuss issue is not one of them.

[BlueDenimLamp]

Originally Posted by jcalzaretta

Rolling Stone is supposed to be about music. We know their taste is horrible. They are trying to be politcal, which they should not. Fleetwood Mac should be on the cover. Plain and simple.

Why should FM be "On The Cover Of The Rolling Stone"(think of the song) at this point in time when they haven't done anything other than announce that Christine has returned? When and if a new record comes out and it sells like hotcakes or receives critical acclaim then RS should put FM on the cover...

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by BlueDenimLamp

Why should FM be "On The Cover Of The Rolling Stone" at this point in time when they haven't done anything other than announce that Christine has returned? When and if a new record comes out and it sells like hotcakes or receives critical acclaim then RS should put FM on the cover...

I agree. Well, I don't think the album has to sell like hotcakes. But I do think they deserve to make the cover when they have a new album. Yes, Christine's return is news, but that's all the news they have. They just came off a tour. That's not news. So, until they have done something that's worthy of a cover, or as my beloved Elaine would say "sponge-worthy," then No Cover For You.

Michele

[MikeInNV]

Originally Posted by jcalzaretta

Rolling Stone is supposed to be about music. We know their taste is horrible. They are trying to be politcal, which they should not. Fleetwood Mac should be on the cover. Plain and simple.

They shouldn't be on the cover yet, but hopefully they will have a reason to be soon. And Rolling Stone has always been political.