Rolling Stone seeks 'thought leaders' willing to pay $2k to write for them | Hacker News Reader

Rolling Stone seeks 'thought leaders' willing to pay $2k to write for them

theguardian.com

33 pointsrobin_reala19 comments

Open articleView on HN

Are you rich and think that Limp Bizkit is criminally underrated? This is your chance to fix that problem in your life!

I've waited my whole life for this moment!

Ah you pay them.

So this is sponsored article, just more directly advertised to all willing to pay.

And more obscured that its an ad and not an article written by at least semi independent party.

I understand that journals and magazines are dying off and they are grasping at anything to produce revenue. But this is literately jumping into grave.

When people realise you paper is just elaborate ad scheme its all over.

This would make sense if Rolling Stones wants to be a sort of Medium: You pay us to host your content.

However to make sense they’d also have to share the profits from the ads on the page.

The point is not hosting, but to monetize the Rolling Stone's brand reputation. They have a well-known and somewhat trusted brand (although less trusted than it once was [0]). They're allowing "thought leaders"—aka PR flacks—to leverage their brand to publicize marketing and personal branding content. Forbes does the same.

[0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/06/business/media/rolling-st...

Didn’t realise Forbes did this. No wonder it’s full of garbage.

That’ll quickly devalue that “brand”. Kind of like how I “value” Forbes “magazine” — ie: avoid all links to it.

Yes, it will. But it's owned by Penske Media Corporation, who seem to prefer to milk the brand for all it's worth before its inevitable demise.

Presumably they are cashing in on their name so you’ll get more exposure to your idea if you publish on Rolling Stone vs Medium. So what they are selling you is eyeballs and legitimacy for content & money. Makes sense.

It’s a shame because I grew up reading Spin & Rolling Stone and they have become unsustainable and now irrelevant empty shells of themselves.

I don't quite get the analogy - Medium doesn't charge a fee to host content, does it?

OK I have to admit on reading the title and a few comments my first thoughts were 'why would you bother'.

Now I've read the article it makes sense if you're a struggling magazine and need money. Also if you got something to sell and need a cheap worldwide platform to advertise on.

They have been doing this for years with "Forbes [sector] Council" and a bunch of "[city name] Business Journal" sites ran by the same company.

The Guardian on the other hand pays people to lead thought all the time. Too bad it doesn't work.

This has been a long time feature of Forbes. At least Rolling Stone would be a cooler byline.

Wonder if this is a sign of desperation?

I mean, every other science journal does it

I thought every outlet does it, including the Guardian themselves.

Forbes does as well

Oh, now I know why I got the Forbes invite with just a bit of contribution when I was literally a student lol.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com