Is Rolling Stone magazine just a joke now?!

Is Rolling Stone magazine just a joke now?

I used to think that Rolling Stone magazine had some credibility and integrity when it came to music reviews. When I heard about Panic! at the Disco making the cover, I was skeptical, but willing to let it slide. I checked out the site, and some of the past cd reviews, and do these guys know anything about music? I didn't see a single review on the site for anything that you can't find on some Now! compilation (that's a bad thing). Also, their reviewers praise bands like Nickelback, Fall Out Boy, Panic!, and Trivium, while criticizing artists like Switchfoot for being too generic. One review even criticized Joe Satriani's Flying in a Blue Dream for being nothing but tedious finger-exercises. It seems that they're trying less to write intelligent, informative music reviews, and more to appease pop music enthusiasts in their quest to surpress originality.

6 months ago
Yeah, I've noticed that they have a habit of bashing new artists if they aren't well known. They gave bands like Led Zep and AC/DC terrible reviews when they were just starting out, but they praise them when they know other people will agree.

6 months ago
Oh, and if anybody needs any further proof that this is exactly what they're doing, just take a look at this:
http://www.rollingstone.com/artists/pink...
Pink Floyd took some risks, so Rolling Stone bashed them until they were accepted. Now they're big fans, even though little changed with Pink Floyd's sound.

Rolling Stone used to be cool but now they've just lame. They put Led Zeppelin on their cover a couple months ago just to bring up sales. If they stuck to rock n roll they will sale every month. But as soon as they put Britney Spears on the cover they lost all credibility.