Slightly uncomfortable with the idea of this - yes, it is literally 'priceless', whereas the magazine is the work of many journalists, whose work should have a value. It's different to scanning an old, out-of-print publication that most of us would never get to see - this is a new publication which is available now, and can be bought and sent pretty much anywhere in the world:

https://nme.backstreetmerch.com/shipping-zones

It's not even the same as sharing a bootleg. Would you rip and upload Fleetwood Mac's new album, and offer it for free? Home taping is killing music!!

Hehehehe.The Mac wont like the idea.LOL.....

Good point.Home taping has been going on since I was a teen and even before that.To be honest .I still do it today.

Quality of music is killing the industry itself.:eek:

Thanks Nicole!

Posting this isn't doing all that much damage. It's not like thousands upon thousands are going to download something one person posted rather than buying it themselves, especially since it's not in book stores in many countries. Plus, it's actually kind of free advertising. You might not have considered buying it before, especially if you thought it was only going to be a few pages on the Mac (as I originally did), but when you see what it actually is, you might go ahead and fork over the money for a hard copy.

I've taken a number of songs for free from Youtube, solely because Itunes doesn't offer them or are album only offerings. Of course I generally support paying for songs, but I'm not going to pay for the entire album of This Is 40 when I can find Lindsey's songs on Youtube.

Well, I didn't mean the magazine was priceless. It has a definite price. I meant, Nicole's contribution was priceless.

No, I wouldn't rip a new (or even an old) in print FM album and share it for free, nor would I let it be shared on the site. But I'm happy to have the magazine article posted. I bought the Uncut for my Kindle Fire and would have posted it myself here, but I actually only know how to deal with photobucket. So, when there are too many pages for me to screen cap and upload, I don't share.

I take your point however. I have ethical concerns about other things, but not this.

Michele

Especially when the band isn't concerned at all by our posting the article here, the money that would have been spent on the magazine weren't supposed to go to the band's pockets but in the publishing house funds. The journlists get payed anyway in spite of the number of sold copies.
I'd say that this Uncut magazine doesn't risk at all to go broke.

Co-sign. Thank you, Nicole!

I bought it the other day. I particularly like the fact that each of the 17 studio albums gets a review of a broadly similar size. I can only dare hope that this increases interest in the Bob Welch years here in the UK. There's the odd mistake here and there, but isn't there always?

The Ledge itself gets the odd nod here and there, including Bob Welch's Q & As as well as acknowledging an uncredited Ledgie (it's Neb-Maat-Re, as it turns out) who tracked down details of Mrs Scarrott.

Ah well, just an observation. Nicole's scans are a great way of letting the FM community know about this publication.

I know no one will go broke, but good print journalism is an endangered species these days - in fact, all print journalism - and since this is the only decent overview of the band's whole career we've had since - well, ever, - I would say, if you like what you've seen, buy the real thing too! Physical is always better than digital...

On this I totally agree.
However since I couldn't have afforded to buy the magazine I'm happy that thanks to Nicole I get to read it at all.

I agree with that. I still keep scrap books or at least I keep large binders with magazines, ticket stubs and concert photos. And I save X-Files clippings, articles, magazines, too and have had to start that up again, with the reboot.

Anyway, I did buy a hard copy of Uncut (and the Mojo one two) on Ebay, but I don't have it yet.

Michele

Just had a quick scan- it looks like a pretty well researched and written piece of work. Disappointed You and I Part 2 was adjudged to be on a par with These Strange Times though. Also, Bleed to Love Her was harshly given 3 stars.

I think I'll start reading properly from the beginning and simultaneously play through everything I own now.

Thank you Nicole

As a longtime professional music journalist who has been out of work and job hunting, fruitlessly, for the last year, I need to point out that pretty much everything in this post sounds like self-justifying rationalizing of theft. As a FM fanatic, I'm as happy as anyone to have the contents of this magazine posted here so I can read it -- but I won't try to justify to myself that it is "right" to not pay for written content, or music, and I hope the rest of you don't either. Too many of my friends and colleagues -- incredibly knowledgable writers who dedicated their lives to music -- have lost most of their income, and in many cases has to change careers entirely, as I am on the verge of doing, because Internet sharing has led society over the last 15 years to believe stealing is okay.

I mean, I get it. I want things for free too. I guess what I'm saying is: do what you're gonna do, but don't try to pretend it's anything but theft.

Someone else commented that they're sure this magazine isn't near bankruptcy. Don't be so certain of that. A huge percentage of music publications have gone under thanks to the era of "sharing," including some of the biggest ones and many (probably MOST) of the smaller ones -- the niche magazines that are the most likely to feature bands like Fleetwood Mac. So share if you must, but please buy a copy as well, and please encourage others to do the same.

And even if they are financially fine, that's not really the point. No one in Fleetwood Mac will go to the poor house if we download their music for free, but it's generally accepted around here that it's wrong to do so.

I think the vast majority of the demographic who frequent this forum and even on my Tumblr (which does have less than 400 followers) WANT the physical copy. I did wonder whether it was right to upload the entire thing. At the moment, the benefits outweigh the guilt for me.

I'm clear and free on the 'stealing' bit, though (even though I could've waited and downloaded from a forum I use which uploads dozens of ebooks and magazines daily...). I paid over $10 for the digital copy, $30 for the print one to be delivered and will probably have to fork out another $15 for another print copy for my Mum when it gets to newsagencies here. I'm a collector; I love print magazines and have a nice stack of them from Mojo, Q, Word, and Uncut. I'm still bitter about Word going under. However, I like having digital copies as well. I think some people fall into that boat. Really, there are multiple reasons a person might download the PDF and only one of them means the publisher/author is losing out monetarily.

1. They can’t afford or access the magazine (in which case, they wouldn’t have bought it anyway)
2. They can afford the magazine and will buy or have bought it, but they want a digital copy for convenience or because they don’t want to wait (me)
3. They want to check the content out before buying it (in which case, most of those people wouldn’t have bought it anyway so it may actually INCREASE sales)
4. Cheapskates who don’t want to pay for anything

Really, though, I think the vast majority of people in this case still like having a physical copy of something, and that Category 4 is actually smaller than the others. Maybe that’s me being naive. It's not a 'casual buy' like a new popular record is or anything, though; it's a bit different, I think.

I want to thank you for downloading it. I am one of those people who want to know the quality of something before I purchase it. (I got burned on the Shindig issue, which was really poorly done.) Having downloaded it and read through most of the record reviews, I am now committed to buying the paper edition. It will be a feast, since there are a lot of early-era articles and interviews I have never seen before.

So, yes, thank you! And you shouldn't feel guilt. The magazine is making sale based on my reaction to your download.

............................

I was pretty impressed with a lot of the research and the record reviews, which were largely fair and not afraid to depart from majority opinion in a few places. No surprises about RUMOURS, of course, but seeing how highly HEROES was valued compared to the mixed reaction to MYSTERY says the writer(s) was not merely rehashing popular opinions. I didn't always agree with the conclusions: nothing on FLEETWOOD MAC deserves two stars, especially "Sugar Daddy"; "Why" getting four stars while "Just Crazy Love" got five; the lukewarm reception to "Miles Away"; awarding "You and I Part 2" one star...But overall I was impressed with how honest and fair the album assessments really were. Even "oft-overlooked moments of success on TIME were given due recognition.