PopEx ≫ 1999 ≫ popEx tumescent as sheep arrive. Bit iffy, says shrink.

The number of popEx punters is set to swell this week, following a glowing NME review. The allocation of nearly 50 prime words to the site is seen as a coup at this time of year, given that all print media are bound by law to devote themselves to reminding new university students that they are, er, students. However, experts regard the decision as controversial, accusing the music weekly of “a complete lack of objectivity, disregard for the facts, and corruption.”

The NME, once described as ‘like a Bible, but less churchy’, is renowned for the devotion of its readership. “It’s almost as if their brains are on giant strings,” warned one psychologist yesterday. “If you or I were to say to someone ‘this is good, you should try it,’ we could expect to be arrested for mindwashing. But when the NME does it, their eyes glaze over and they start walking about with their arms held out in front of them, like big sheep zombies. This so-called review stops short of saying ‘interested readers might enjoy visiting the site’, but only just.”
“As a result, the entire readership will be flocking to buy Chili Peppers shares, only to find that they are not available. The consequences of this irresponsible journalism are, in my opinion, a bit iffy.”

After discussing at length how great his own band were and how progrock was all that mattered, the expert questioned the ethics of what he called “blatant advertising”.

“There are over 50 billion pages on the web, and the NME just happens to massively plug the one run by an NME employee? Now, is that a coincidence or is it a bloody great conspiracy?”



⬅️ :: ➡️
Wed Oct 06 1999

This content originally from my very popular (in the late 1990s) site popex.com. Some of this contributed by other people, so mostly editorial originally created by me. I moved the content here here when the website eventually shut down at the start of the '00s. Hope this ignites memories (if you find it).