What an absolute pile of crap this magazine has become, yet since it is the only rock weekly barring Terrorizer (for the more 'extreme' tastes), it has healthy sales. If only Metal Hammer and Rock Sound came out more frequently than once a month, they would wither and die without anyone noticing, or caring.

Back in the 80s it was almost vital reading for fans of KISS, Iron Maiden et al, and up until the mid-90s there were redeeming features, apart from £1.50 a week, you must be kidding me.

But since then it has turned into Smash Hits with bands that play their own instruments. The first bad signs were giving a wee bit too much coverage to Bon Jovi for anyone's liking, but it was let off considering what happened to Raw in 1995, turning into another NME, and fading away due to the readership getting pissed off, and the potential readership too narrow minded to switch. Indie kids, indeed.

There was also a slight diversion into indie territories. Terrorvision could be overlooked due to selling out, Skunk Anansie can fuck off in my book, but not many others, but it still had a base to stand on.

Until they got carried away and moved onto the current Planet Rock bollocks. Planet Rock my ass. It basically has a population of any So-Cal/Orange County 'punk' band, a few flavour of the months and not a lot else. Yes, that means you, Slipknot, if you hadn't noticed.

Other problems seem to be the journalistic talent (ahem) try to sound hard, but what gets printed is f**k, or c**t. Wow, how hard, can write naughty words, but no they fucking can't. I can, and I'm prety close to just calling them a bunch of cunts. Too late, just have. And there goes my GeoCities seal of approval. They can put the others, which is a double standars, I mean saying shit, piss, bollocks, ass, twat etc is just as offensive, so who are they going to offend. OK, so a survey taken showed 1% of those surveyed found 'bloody' to be offensive, whilst the Number One was motherfucker, followed by the aforemeantioned profanities which just cost me a couple of parental awards, I'm sure. Fuck 'em.

And do they actually go to the gigs they review. I was at the Korn gig at Brixton in Feb '97, and the only member that said anything was Fieldy, mumbling some thanx to the support bands, so how did they come up with Head saying 'What up we're Dio'? The NIN gig at Brixton was also the same, given a scant review whilst the flavours got large segments. Who is more influential exactly, Trent Reznor or some dick no-one will give a shit about in a couple of years?

They also have the most pissy attitude to most stars. Constantly they take the piss out of Limp Bizkit, but when they do an interview they suck Fred Durst's cock so much it's painful, then go back to bitching when he's safely back in Jacksonville. And if tha isn't bad enough, they are lazy, too. They printed the same Static-X article TWICE, hoping no-one would notice. Well, if the readership is that fickle just looking to them for guidance, they probably didn't, since they were too busy trying to find all the Slipknot merchandise they could carry.

Constantly taking the piss out of Barney Greenway of Napalm Death is also a bad idea. No interviews, and they have a solid fanbase, not the drifters that Slipknot, Offspring, System of a Down, Kittie yadda yadda yadda all have right now. So if they want to slag off Korn to feel good about themselves, better watch out, that's a large quota of your readership there. Why did I just give them this advice? Hang on, not literate enough to type in the URL, too many long words, such as 'www'. And name me another magazine that give (hed)p.e. crap reviews because their name is too hard to type? Of course, how a monkey uses a keyboard is a major influence when it comes to a band, not, I dunno, music.

And when someone writes in to tell them this (admittedly asking for it), the Editor's reply is oh so observed, 'F**k off you stupid c**t' or similar, rather than actually taking heed of all the problems with the 'magazine'. Especially since they can't get their facts right about which band member is which in the photos, which hey have done numerous times of late. They even get name wrong. Mark Einziger isn't the Incubus guitarist, it's MIKE, dumbass.

The reviews section is laughable, and not in any ways obvious. The film reviews say everything is worth seeing on pain of death, apart from Kurt and Courtney, since it taints the memory of some over-rated dickhead from Seattle somehow. Yes, Kurt Cobain is God, and we have to pity Courtney Love for getting famous after he shot himself and revelling in the attention. Sorry, not supposed to speak the truth, so not going to get a job there. But you know what they say about silver linings.

And to them the underground is what they take to work from their homes in idyllic suburbia, before writing an issue in...I'd say 5 minutes per article. Probably on a PowerBook for beginners and other retards, actually. So rather than cover up-and-coming bands unless supporting some big name live, which merits a whole paragraph (ie less than an inch and about 50 words), they get ignored. No wonder the British Scene is so poor, it rarely gets a meantion from this lot. No, they decide that image is everything (haven't I already ripped enough out of Slipknot?), talent not always necessary (as before), and only the States produces bands, barring Black Sabbath and Iron Maiden when they're in a patronising mood. Kittie's sudden emergance covered quite well, then. As are the bedsheets of these middle ages dickheads out of touch with just about everything in front of them in the music scene without the required amount of hooks.

Hey, if Axl Rose ripped into them on record, you know I'm not the only one that knows how shit they are. Which makes their lofty impressions of themselves all the more painful.