A clarification: Mark Remy, editor-in-chief of the new magazine Giant e-mailed me to suggest my flip implication that the launch of his magazine in the midst of a Maxim meltdown may not have been the best of timing.
I guess neither you nor your stealthy scout bothered to pick up a copy of GIANT. Because even a cursory look will tell you that we are not a “lad” magazine by any stretch, despite the unfortunate wording of that Seattle P.I. hed. For that matter, I guess you didn’t bother to read beyond said headline at all, because the writer of this piece herself says in the 3rd graf that GIANT “isn’t following that ballyhooed formula” and then goes on to detail exactly what makes us different from the lad magazines. Check us out. You may be pleasantly surprised.
I’ll admit that the headline of the article I pointed to, “New Lad Magazine Promises no Britney and no Snark” misled me into thinking Giant is a lad magazine. My bad. Now that I’ve read the article and the magazine’s website I know that it isn’t a lad magazine with pictures of young women in bikinis but rather an entertainment magazine for men. A comparison of covers (see above) sure does convince me that Giant is not that kind of lad magazine. Or, as the magazine explains on its website:
“(Giant is a) magazine that covers all the stuff (the reader loves), like Jack Black, South Park, Christina Ricci, The Office, Paul Bettany, Willem Dafoe, Russian posters, Talking Heads, Marmaduke, Adam Sandler, monkeys, the Beta Band, John Waters, Doom 3, Kurt Vonnegut, Magnum, P.I., that guy who was in Groundhog Day and Memento, stormtrooper costumes, Steve Martin, pirates, Ray Charles, James Ellroy, Devo, Teen Wolf, Scrabble and ALF?”
I’m glad to clarify that.
rexblog bumper music: Even the Losers (Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers)