The job would be made even easier if Rolling Stone went back to being about music, though, and tried to avoid talking about Trump or Clinton, and the like, except where strictly necessary for talking about music.
One of Hunter S Thompson's most famous works was a series of articles in Rolling Stone covering the 1972 presidential election of Nixon/McGovern. It was good stuff, very readable, and yet he was clearly biased towards McGovern (which was clearly an unpopular opinion as he ended up losing in one of the biggest landslide loses in presidential history).
Nothing wrong with their writers being political or biased. The bigger problem is whether they can talk about politics without being heavy handed, preachy, or trite, like much of politics being pigeon-holed into all forms of media today.
It seems many journalists today have lost their sense of humour and everything is overly serious and self-important. Especially when compared to the writings of HST vs what they put out today.
"Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail" is probably the best thing HST ever wrote. Find it, read it, don't take it all completely seriously, and you may learn something.
Rolling Stone was never solely about music, they always ran political reporting. In fact I would argue it's legacy is more known for the work of Hunter S. Thompson than their musical coverage.
The only times the magazine has gained interests has been solely due to their journalists and what they cover, rarely if ever music.
The thing is though, RS was never just about the music. In the late 60s/early 70s, music and politics were both huge topics for youth culture, and RS covered both.
E.g. Hunter Thompson's coverage of the '72 presidential race.
Music isn't created in a vacuum though. A lot of music/movies/books are created as a reflection of what is happening in the world around us, and makes a lot less sense without context.
Nothing wrong with their writers being political or biased. The bigger problem is whether they can talk about politics without being heavy handed, preachy, or trite, like much of politics being pigeon-holed into all forms of media today.
It seems many journalists today have lost their sense of humour and everything is overly serious and self-important. Especially when compared to the writings of HST vs what they put out today.