Due to an intern error, the entire text of "Recap of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame 25th Anniversary Concerts, Night Two" (November 2, 2009) was replaced with an IM conversation between a Rock and Roll Hall of Fame executive and Bono. We regret the error and the intern has since been fired, while the executive has been given a raise and has been instructed to give half of it to Bono, tax-free.
UToo63: Just know thyself, brother.
WorldDominator99: I know thyself, man, it'll be fine.
WorldDominator99: *myself
UToo63: I'm just concerned about the N.D. situation ['N.D.' is Neil Diamond, who has, controversially to at least one person, not yet been inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.]
WorldDominator99: Look I don't think we're gonna have a repeat of last time.
Utoo63: He was very angry. I gave him a massage in my dressing room, played him a couple of songs, even, and it didn't work. You have to make sure they don't let him in this time.
WorldDominator99: What songs did you play him?
Utoo63: "With Or Without You." Twice. Which I think really captured how he was feeling at the time. Or rather, the world perception of him as an artist, his brand identity at the time, like, not being able to live without Neil Diamond songs because they are everywhere you go, and not being able to live with them because they are not in the Rock Hall Of Fame yet. Or, another interpretation is that you can't live with the songs because you don't like them, but you can't live without them, because you sort of do like them. The songs, you know, they creep inside your soul while you're asleep through the radio waves even if the radio is off, so you're both living with them, because they are inside your soul, and living without them, because you're asleep when you're hearing them. The second time round I sort of tried to change the lyrics a little bit, slowed down the tempo ... I can live with you / I can't live without you / Neil.
WorldDominator99: Maybe your massage wasn't adequate.
Utoo63: >:(
WorldDominator99: What kind of an emoticon is that?
Utoo63: I'm both sad and angry.
WorldDominator99: You? Sad?
Utoo63: It's been a tough year for us.
*
Due to an editorial stranglehold placed upon a junior editor and space issues, this week's cover story on The Arctic Monkeys (November 2, 2009) featured a truncated quote from the band's lead singer, ("We can't tell you what our next album is called.") The full quote is, "We don't know what our next album is called because we just finished writing the one that came out last week. And also we are wondering why this story made it onto the cover of your magazine, and are wondering whether you might consider turning this magazine into a monthly, or perhaps a yearly, so that you might have a better chance of running stories that are actually about something."
We regret the error, and would also like to take this opportunity—the "Corrections" section of this magazine doesn't have space constraints—to remind everyone that we introduced the world to this band, and that if we hadn't ... well can you imagine? Can you even imagine? Nobody would have. It's that simple. Stop imagining.
Due to an unfamiliarity with HTML, our "Top 2000 Albums of the 2000s" (November 1, 2009) mistakenly listed the albums in alphabetical order by first letter of band name instead of in long-argued-over numerically-ranked order. The resulting flood of comments about the proximity of Jay Reatard's Blood Visions to Joanna Newsom's Ys caused our server to crash, which then erased every document and website containing information about what albums came out between 2000 and 2009 and how we felt about them. We were forced to collectively recall the albums from memory and came up with the following:
Joanna Newsom - Ys
Jay Reatard - Blood Visions
Air - Talkie Walkie
Mariah Carey - Butterfly Was that really 1997? Man, time flies.
Adam Lambert - Y'all Ready For This? (We are not sure of the title of this one but believe we are capturing the tone accurately.)
Due to a dick move, our review of Carrie Underwood's new album (November 3, 2009) failed to mention that our writer suffered considerably because, as we wrote, "Underwood's label didn’t make her new album available early for press; the album came out today." Our writer stayed up until midnight to purchase the album when the clock struck 12:01 am on its day of release, i.e. today. Because she felt it would be unfair to review an album without listening to it several times, she played it straight through ten times and started writing her review at about 10 am this morning. But since this method resembles Guantanamo torture practices, the writer feels that she has given the public a distorted sense of what the album is actually like.
In particular she regrets the sentence, "The second verse is like a
parallel-parking job that strayed too far from the curb." She regrets
comparing the singer's voice to a "lamb taken to slaughter, then spared
at the last second because of its adorable appearance." She also
regrets describing one of the album's songs as the "sonic equivalent of
a Keane painting" because after seven hours of listening to the album,
she was trying to convey how much it was like the overproduced British
band Keane, but when she Googled the word "Keane" she ended up getting
sidetracked by Google Image Search and thought, in her delusional,
seven-album-listens-in state, how Keynesian—I mean Keane-like—as in
Margaret—the song sounded.
Most of all, the writer regrets that Underwood's label was so afraid
of music piracy as to disallow advance copies to music critics, some of
whom aren't even critical that often or ever. She is wondering if she
can get an 'Amen.'
