Well, I've read many of the arguements that have appeared in Kerrang!
over the last few months, and watched the quality of the magazine
plummet. So finally I thought I'd let loose with my comments. So this
is going to be long. I guess ultimately it is up to you whether you
wish to read it and take note, or just dismiss it as the misguided
grumblings of someone who only helps to keep you in a job.

A number of people have commented about the lack of quality in
Kerrang! these days, and the tendancy so it seems, to follow a
trend. Kerrang! constantly tries to fight back when answering these
accusations. The problem however is, that it then usually goes and shoots
itself in the foot with what it publishes the following week.

Any magazine has to sell enough in order to be able to survive. And
that necessitates covering bands that are popular, in order to entice
readers. I can appreciate that. But there's a point where it's taken
too far. How many articles do we need on the established stars WHEN
THEY DON'T HAVE NEW MATERIAL OUT. There's only so much you can
publish. Did we really need an 8 page feature on a certain band which
ultimately only told us that they smoke a lot of dope? I don't think
so. But worse, it necessitated a visit by a Kerrang! journalist to New
York in order to achieve this. And then weeks later, we had another
major feature on the same band.  At least this gave us something
different to read. But, if the first interview had been worthy of
inclusion, then the second wouldn't have been warranted.

Which of course is another thing. The quality of the interviews. Why
is everything designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator?
For example, when it comes to female members of bands, why is it
constantly a sex angle? Of course because it appeals to some
people. But well, you've interviewed and spoken with Aimee from HWP
right, and if it's the same person I've interviewed, then you'll know
that she's intelligent and has some interesting views on things. So
why not go in search of them, instead of focussing on the fact that
she's a female in a band. Or maybe even just acknowledge at some point
that there are other people in the band.

Same with the so-called stoner bands. As a result of being a 'stoner'
band, are drugs the only thing that you can ask them about?

And the news section. How Marilyn Manson's makeup smudged. What about
some of the real news?  You don't give it the coverage it
deserves. Minimal coverage on the Alternative Tentacles legal case
(the Crucifucks and their album cover). Surely that was of major
importance given the circumstances surrounding the case. The fact that
an independant label, which champions unknown, sometimes
anti-establishment bands, was being put to the sword to the tune of 2
million Dollars should strike a note of fear within rock fans and the
press, regardless of whether you actually like the music that the
label puts out.

And what about the Human Waste Project situation with Hollywood
Records. Although I can understand there that there may be legal
problems. But in a time where people are understandably annoyed that
certain American bands are cancelling for unknown reasons, surely you
could've highlighted that HWP had to fight tooth and nail to be able
to make it to the Ozzfest. It's a case of balanced coverage. There was 
one paragraph on it, but the news was actually around maybe a month to 
6 weeks prior to that.

And did we need the serialisation of the Marilyn Manson autobiography?
Ah, "but some people would like to read it, and can't afford to buy the
book" etc. So will you be serialising Iron Maiden's autobiography? Not
popular enough? Even though they had a major impact on Mansons
ambitions, and indeed many other bands who won't admit it because it's
not credible enough these days.

These are all, in my opinion, unnecessary features. 

During this time, you could've featured a whole slew of UK bands who
were getting ready to release albums. Pulkas. Gorilla. King
Prawn. Iron Monkey. Medulla Nocte. One Minute Silence. Cynical
Smile. Dog Toffee. Skyscraper. The Jellys. The Beekeepers.
dBh. Snub. Sack Trick. Liberty 37. Assert. Knuckledust.
Lockdown. Cowboy Killers. The list can go on. But there is virtually
nothing. When one of these bands DOES get featured, it warrants a
page, or less. An American band can get much more. Or at least that is
how it appears.  What happens? Does Kerrang! ask the UK bands for an
interview, only to be politely turned down in their request? I highly
doubt it. I've got no problem with the variety of the bands you
feature, the more crossover and breaking down of prejudicial barriers
the better.  But it's just the amount of coverage some get, and the
lack of support others get. Normally smaller UK bands. So why are they
not given equal support? There needs to be a better balance.

Do you never receive demos? Are all the demos of such horrific quality
that you can't suddenly turn around one week and say "we've had a
wonderful demo from X this week. So we thought we'd find out more and
tell you about them. Contact them to get the demo and more
information. They're actually very good". Why can't you do this?

Would it really hurt to spare more than 1/3 of a page on three new
bands? I had a demo the other week from a band called Milque that I
thought was as good as the last Tura album and many of the bands coming
over from the States. Not everyone will agree, but some might. Why not
give people the chance to find out and decide for themselves.

So the question STILL remains with me. "Why don't you feature more new
bands?"  Go and find some playing in the local toilet venue, and then
tell us about them?  And don't say there's nothing good out
there. Anyone who listens out knows that's not true. That's what
Kerrang! should be doing instead of 100 ... features. Augment the
popular with the unknown. Give new bands some help and exposure. You
may say you do so, but when you look at the amount of wasted coverage
in the magazine, it's obvious you don't.  A small paragraph on a band
is not coverage. Surely you can spare more than that? If you can waste
so many pages on telling us the 100 coolest people, then you have
enough space to spare on an actual band. After all, that's what it's
all about isn't it ... bands ... music? Without new bands constantly
coming through, where's the future?

I grew up in a part of Wales where you couldn't always find everything
new. Magazines such as Kerrang! helped to tell me about new bands. But
now I've moved and have access to more material, I see that even that
isn't enough. There's so much more out there, and Kerrang!  needs to
improve it's coverage, not sit back on it's laurels waiting for the
congratulations to come rolling in from major stars.

After all, if Kerrang! is as influential as it seems to think it is
with people, then it has a duty to give equal coverage to bands. After
all, you have the ability to help make them or break them.

And then there's the ultimate shooting of the limbs. The 100
.... features.  We've just had another. That's 21 pages this
time. Why?  What's next? 100 people that fuck?  What is it telling us?
It's telling us that Kerrang! has nothing better to fill it's pages
with. And that's just plain wrong. There are so many bands out there
that you could be telling us about. But that entails Kerrang! going
out and looking for these bands and telling us, rather than waiting in
the office for some major label to contact them telling them of the
latest and greatest from the States. Why is it, that the underlying
feeling that emanates from Kerrang! is one of people who sit around on
their arses all day waiting for something to come to them, as opposed
to going looking for something. That may not be the case of what
actually happens, but it's definitely how it comes across. That's what
you should be doing, getting out there and finding things out.

Another example of the wastage was the rehashed interviews
recently. Yes, some people won't have read them before. But, that kind
of justification doesn't really wash. The thought "they've got nothing
else to write about" springs to mind much more readily than "oh, what
a wonderful service to us the readers". You want people to have access to
those articles? There's back issues where available. And the Internet,
like it or not, is a valuable resource for this sort of thing. Create
a site and place archive interviews like this on it for people to
read. Then people the world over view them.

For what it's worth, I'm trying not to make this an ill-informed
judgement. I produce my own 'zine where I try to cover smaller bands
as well as the more popular ones. It's self-produced, and totally
self-financed. I receive no freebies etc. So I do know the amount of
work that it entails. And I do know that you can't cover everything
and please all the people all the time. I do interviews with American
bands such as HWP, System of a Down, Far etc. So I've got nothing
against them whatsoever. But I also try and cover the new UK
bands. I've mentioned a host of them already, the vast majority of
whom I've done interviews with for the zine. Plus Stampin' Ground,
Liberty 37, Breed 77 etc. I've had some excellent demos in the last
few months as well. Seratone. Milque. Pepperman.  Scarabeaus. To name
a few. Seen some excellent up and coming bands recently. And with
luck, I'll be featuring them all soon. So why can't you?

In producing my 'zine I've talked with a number of people, and it has
to be said, that the current verdict on Kerrang! is not good. You
really need to get out there and talk to the people, listen to
them. Stop sometimes with the self-congratulatory pat on the back.
And take time to listen to the people who don't tell you how wonderful
you are. Maybe, just maybe, they have a point. Do something to
help. If you believe that everyone loves you, then you're guilty of
believing your own press. And that's not a good thing.

Kerrang! is the only weekly voice for 'rock' music in the UK. It
should be using that status to fight against the machine, not just
become another cog in it. Many 'zines do this sort of thing. But they
can never address the size of audience that Kerrang! can. 

I don't know what the response is to polls within Kerrang! But why not
put this to the poll. Would people like to see more and longer feature
on demo bands and upcoming new bands. Not in replacement of what's
already there, but to augment it. To compliment it. Instead sometimes
of the wasted features, and the blanket coverage of certain bands.
Strike a better balance.

It's up to you whether you take any notice of this. But for your own 
good, I believe you really should take a good look at yourselves.