Mossy Elixir: Rolling Stone at 50

"You're probably wondering what we're trying to do. It's hard to say: sort of a magazine and sort of a newspaper. The name of it is Rolling Stone which comes from an old saying, ‘A rolling stone gathers no moss’. Muddy Waters used the name for a song he wrote. The Rolling Stones took their name from Muddy's song. "Like a Rolling Stone" was the title of Bob Dylan's first rock and roll record. We have begun a new publication reflecting what we see are the changes in rock and roll and the changes related to rock and roll."

So stated publisher Jann Wenner in the November 9, 1967 inaugural issue of his magazine.  A lot has transpired over the subsequent five decades. For much of that time it was incredibly powerful and influential, anointing stars and prolonging careers, while nurturing a small army of talented writers who left their stamp on topics ranging from pop to politics. (A couple of whom, particularly Matt Taibbi, rescued the magazine from total irrelevance in the ‘00s.) When it was good, it was very good. And for a long stretch the magazine deserved its exalted reputation as the mainstream's go-to source for rock and pop culture with a splash of politics. But, along the way, the missteps piled up and at times in a seemingly tone deaf and almost deliberate manner. That its online comments section—regardless of the topic at hand—has become a nest of often disgusting vitriol-spewing for a significant number of reactionary conservatives, is as far removed from its hippie, San Francisco origins as one can imagine.

Rock and roll’s diminishing stature as youth culture’s lingua franca, not to mention physical publishing’s economic woes have sent many other competitors to their graves. Yet Rolling Stone lingers on. How much longer? “We’ll see”, said the blind man.

[Above: Rolling Stone no. 980, Aug. 11, 2005]