Spin article sucks

I just saw the Spin article on South Park and it blows. I usually find Rolling Stone highly pretentious but at least their article involved meeting with Trey and Matt and gave new info. Instead, Spin's ripoff artists start with a sketch on the cover of Chef holding Cartman's nipples and announce "a largely unauthorized look at TV's stoopidest show." I wonder if Bob Guccione is getting off at that sight. Usually, unauthorized articles purport to offer new information that subjects won't reveal. Spin just writes about stuff everyone already knows about (Matt and Trey's other projects, episode capsules, etc.). And to make up for their lack of insight, Spin makes up storylines future episodes could follow which are somewhat funny and has a really dumb clip where a psychologist analyzes the South Park kids. Spin wonders how a cartoon so funny can top itself without going into oblivion (I had that thought after last night's Jesus vs. Satan episode). Spin should probably wonder how this might not happen to them (Motley Crue article, fashion spreads, etc.). My advice to anyone who wants to read this is to go to one of those bookstores with reading areas where you can read the magazines without buying them.

I didn't think it was that bad

involved meeting with Trey and Matt and gave new info

I liked the Stone story too

holding Cartman's nipples I wonder if Bob Guccione is >getting off at that sight.

It was a spoof cover based on the Janet Jackson album cover

Not everyone knows about this stuff. I have people I work with who only know the cartoon itself. This article gave them info they did not already know.

That was their point. The story was a good reference point for anyone who is interested in learning more about the first few episodes and wants an article that entertains.

Rock