okay, here's the deal...

Though to try to play J3|2|2Y's advocate, if he/she/it feels, as the chief editor of a music rag, that he/she/it doesn't want to pursue any type of story based on the band, that's his/her/its right to say no. Even then, if he/she/it/they wanted to pursue it, I'm assuming (?) being a middleperson coordinating passes and interview scheduling would be enough of a task (especially if it was Radiohead) to warrant complete passion for the band in question before approving it.. and, well, it seems pretty obvious that passion isn't there as far as the magazine was concerned.

I'm only saying this because you seemed particularly incensed by all of this -- like more enraged than I expected for this type of thing - - and I was wondering if it was simply the manner you were rejected that was the source of this, or that you were rejected, period. Or both.

Though I'm wondering if a certain |\|3o| R/-\99311 were editor in question, and someone proposed to his live editor the idea of a Rage Against The Machine tour diary/interview thing, what his reaction would be. ;-) (Oh, I'm sure |\|3o| would be much nicer about it.. right? RIGHT?)

I'm not trying to further deflate your bubble, but -- I mean -- Radiohead are still considering "the band of the world" in many eyes, and until that fades... that's gonna be a tough gig to get. I wish you luck, though.

Doubtless. ;-)

It's tricky 'cus Radiohead have gotten so much intense and widespread exposure, that it's not surprising that magazines are gonna be very black and white about featuring articles on them.