Stein, an avowed "doo-wop fanatic" who identifies heavily with the music of his youth, feels like there's "quite a bit of catch-up to do." He cites the Hollies, Brenda Lee, Conway Twitty, Gene Pitney, Percy Sledge, Chuck Willis and panoply of doo-wop acts such as the Five Satins ("In the Still of the Night") and the Penguins ("Earth Angel") as acts that should be full-fledged inductees. "I don't want to forget artists from the '50 and '60s, but not at the expense of worthwhile artists from the '70s," he said. "I don't want to sound like George Bush, but I don't want to see anyone left behind. But I really mean it, hence the difference."

Stein goes on to make a prediction, that is laughable in hindsight:

Stein does not predict that any artist, whether in 2001 or in future years, will ever sail into the hall the first year they are eligible, the way, say, the Beatles did in 1988, or Bruce Springsteen did in 1999. He cited a random selection of artists, from James Taylor to Earth, Wind & Fire to Gene Vincent to Parliament-Funkadelic to Joni Mitchell to the Bee Gees to the Velvet Underground, who waited a few, or many, years for induction.

Stein and Van Zandt have been rather candid about their biases in favor of the music of their youth. At some point, don't you have to close the book on that chapter in rock and roll history and start recognizing some of the gaping holes in later periods? How many groups from the 50's and 60's still need to be inducted before the award is completely stripped of its prestige?

As a way to keep a fresh perspective on the Rock Hall, perhaps there should be term limits for the Nominating Committee members. There is little doubt that each of the members, past and present, have been qualified to help shape the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. But you can imagine what happens when the same group meets year after year: At the committee meeting, the member nominates a few artists, they get tossed around and ultimately get rejected or put on the ballot. The next year, the committee member tries again with the same names that didn't make it, and tries to wear down the other members into submission. A five year term limit would allow committee members ample opportunity to advocate for their favorite artists, but wouldn't let them stay so long that their perspective gets outdated.

So, are term limits a good idea? Is five years the right amount of time? Let's hear it in the comments.

Rock Band

Van Zandt has already let it be known that he will be pushing for more '60s bands to be inducted into the Rock Hall next year. But these statements leave the impression that he will actively oppose bands who incorporated electronic music into their sound during the '80s (or even beyond). Not exactly what the Rock Hall was hoping for when it restructured the Nominating Committee two years ago.

Thanks, Casper.

Hilburn... will recount his personal ties with John Lennon, Bob Dylan, Elvis Presley, Johnny Cash, U2, Bruce Springsteen, Michael Jackson, John Fogerty, Prince, Kurt Cobain, Stevie Wonder, Ice Cube, Joni Mitchell, Neil Young, Jack White, and Eminem.

Whether or not Levy remains on the Rock Hall Nominating Committee after leaving Jann Wenner's nest remains to be seen.

The Nominating Committee has gradually become more and more controlling over the process -- up through 2005, there would routinely be 15 or 16 names on the final ballot, but it was reduced it to just nine artists last year. The Voting Committee now has fewer names to consider, and they're often ones they have seen many times before. It's likely there are many voters who would love the chance to decide between Alice Cooper and Tom Waits; The Monkees and Devo; or Genesis and Roxy Music, but they haven't been given that opportunity due to the more restricted ballot.

Why not give the voters more choice? After all, the Voting Committee has succeeded in rejecting only 31 names in 22 years. They should be given the chance to reject many more.

From paying special interest to the nomination process over the past few years, I've been able to draw several conclusions about the selection process.

If you have any insight or theories of your own, please share.

THINGS THAT WILL WORK IN YOUR FAVOR

1. Being a larger than life figure.
The Rock Hall wants to grab headlines, and will need to fill seats and get ratings from the ceremony. Madonna is an enduring pop culture phenomenon, and can be seen as the home run, marquee talent. Only Michael Jackson is really comparable here.

2. Being critically acclaimed AND commercially successful.
Critics and the masses are two distinct camps. If you have favor with both, your chances are excellent. Beastie Boys have sold very well over the course their career--Licensed to Ill was the top-selling rap album of the 80's, and check the wikipedia entry for its accolades. Paul's Boutique, huge critical favorite. Ill Communication topped the charts.

3. Continued success and longevity.
Just because your band is still together, doesn't mean it's relevant. If you've been in the game for decades, and get radio airplay with artists 20 years younger, you have a great chance. Avoid being labeled a nostalgia act.

4. Survival in the face of changing tastes.
Grunge destroyed hair metal. Bands like U2 and R.E.M. adapted and even elevated their careers. Survive cultural sea changes.

5. Have friends in high places.
If you're buddies with Jann Wenner, Jon Landau, Bruce Springsteen or Dave Marsh, you will probably get in.

6. Be old.
The selections are made by crusty dinosaurs. Sonic Youth didn't stand a chance with this committee.

7. Affirmative Action.
The nominating committee will always select several black candidates of wildly varying qualifications. Soul, Blues, R&B, Funk clearly have favor over some guitar-based, predominantly white sub-genres.

THINGS THAT WON'T WORK IN YOUR FAVOR

1. Being prog, hard rock or metal.
Clearly these are not committee favorites. Much of the artists classified as such are boring, pretentious, overly indulgent, or polarizing. Still, many others are great. But it doesn't really matter.

2. Lots of filler.
If you have several essential recordings, but lots of misfires, your legacy will be watered down. Concise and impactful careers, and consistenly good artists will be viewed more highly than low-percentage hitters (3 strikeouts for every home run).

3. Confusing history.
Deep Purple probably has 30 current and former members, denoting by Mach I, II, III, IV, V etc. You do you nominate, who do you exclude? Nobody, it makes your head hurt just thinking about it.

4. Being overtly commercial at the expense of your art.
Bon Jovi and Journey, you lowest common denominator power balladeers, you don't stand a chance.

5. Enemies in high places.
Jann Wenner hates the Monkees. So they won't get in. Dave Marsh hates Kiss, so they won't get in either.

Can anyone think of any others?


As expected, the Nominating Committee contains a selection of rock critics and historians, music industry insiders, current and former Rolling Stone writers, and a few musicians. What is perhaps noteworthy about the list is that four of the 32 members come from a strong hip hop background (Grandmaster Flash & the Furious Five became the first ever rap group inducted into the Rock Hall in 2007). And if that weren't evidence enough that the Rock Hall has officially opened its doors to rap, Jay-Z is on the Rock Hall Board of Directors.

Notable for his absence from the list is Rolling Stone editor and publisher Jann Wenner, who is the Chairman of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Foundation.

In the past 15 years, the Rock Hall has enshrined 97 performers, while the Baseball Hall admitted only 22 players. A key reason is the way voting is conducted.

To make it to Cooperstown, N.Y., a baseball player must get at least 75 percent of the votes, cast by writers who have covered the sport for at least 10 years. To get into Cleveland's Rock Hall, an act needs only 50 percent of the votes.

More than 600 music industry experts (including me) receive ballots -- and don't ask me what the criteria is to be a voter. Moreover, vote totals are not announced, unlike the Baseball Hall, which discloses the results from its 575 or so ballots.

While baseball players can be weighed statistically, a potential Rock Hall of Famer is supposed to be measured by "the influence and significance of the artist's contributions to the development and perpetuation of rock 'n' roll." That's totally subjective, which explains why such lesser acts as the Dells and Percy Sledge are in, and John Mellencamp and Luther Vandross are not.

The rock nominees are chosen by a committee of music-business insiders that, in the past, has included legendary producer Phil Spector, Best Buy exec Gary Arnold and Los Angeles Times critic Robert Hilburn. Their choices often reek of elitism. Stars who have never even made the ballot include Neil Diamond, Kiss, the Moody Blues, the Doobie Brothers, Hall & Oates, Journey, Steve Miller Band, Genesis, Linda Ronstadt, Rush, Yes, Heart, Peter Frampton, Jimmy Buffett and Alice Cooper. That sounds like a Classic Rock Hall of Fame right there.

Are there any other voters who want to step out of the shadows to either support or criticize the process? Contact us.

Nomination and induction into the Hall of Fame is not about popularity, records sales, which label the group is on, or anything other than the process below. The love for, the evaluation of, and the impact of any artist are subjective questions to be answered by the nominators and the voters. Unlike baseball, football, basketball or hockey, statistics are not relevant. Please read below:

The entire nomination and induction process is coordinated by the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Foundation in New York City. Individuals can be inducted in four categories: Performer, Early Influence, Non-Performer and Side-Men. The only formal criteria for the performance category is that an artist has to have had their first record 25 years ago. That said, candidates are reviewed and discussed relative to their impact on this music that we broadly call rock and roll. The innovation and influence of these artists is also critical. Gold records, number one hits, and million sellers are really not appropriate standards for evaluation.

The formal selection of Performers begins with an extensive panel of journalists, historians, previous inductees, noted musicians, industry heads, etc. In turn, those nominated are sent to a committee of more than 800 people around the world (journalists, historians, music industry management, all previous inductees, musicians, etc.) who vote. Those receiving the highest number of votes and more than 50% of the votes cast are inducted into the Hall. Usually, this means five to seven new performing members each year. So you can see the road to being inducted is an arduous one and for the most part, removed from the realm of influences or politics.

Halls of Fame [could be] restructured like pyramids. We'll assign each elected player to a level, with the shakiest picks (the Phil Rizzuto types) on the first floor; solid guys (the Terry Bradshaw types) on the second; no-brainers (the Wade Boggs types) on the third; defining superstars (the Tom Seaver types) on the fourth; and the pantheon guys (The Babe, MJ and the like) in the penthouse.

I once pitched this idea in a column about the Baseball Hall of Fame, but why couldn't every sport adopt it? Imagine how fun the voting would be. And how cool the buildings would look. And the goosebumps you'd get as you climbed to the next level.

What exactly is rock and roll? Having spent many years as a member of the Hall of Fame nominating committee (a position I no longer hold), I can tell you that endless hours have been devoted to this question, and it has never been definitively answered. Some critics — most notably the English writer Charlie Gillett, in his groundbreaking 1970 book, "The Sound of the City" — have argued that rock and roll is, if not "dead," at least historically complete, and now a part of the past.

During my second year on the committee, I received a petition signed by 5000 fans of the Moody Blues requesting that the group be considered for nomination. Personally I am not much of a fan, and neither, apparently, was anyone else on the committee (at least no one who would admit it). Still, I felt they were a legitimate contender for the nomination and that it was my duty to present the petition since so many people had taken a lot of time to put it together. I plunked it down on the conference table to a great roar of laughter from the assembled bigshots.

Jon Landau, Springsteen's manager, asked me if I personally was a fan of theirs. 'Not really,' I said. 'End of discussion,' he said.

On the other hand, I saw how Atlantic Records artists were routinely placed into nomination with no discussion at all, due to the large concentration of Atlantic executives on the committee. I saw how so-called critical favorites were placed into nomination while artists that were massively popular in their time were brushed off. I saw how certain pioneering artists of the 50s and early 60s were shunned because there needed to be more name power on the list, resulting in 70s superstars getting in before the people who made it possible for them. Some of those pioneers still aren't in today — but Queen is.

I was finally kicked off the committee after writing a guest editorial for Billboard in which I criticized the Hall for its insider ways.

Almost ten years later nothing has changed.

The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Foundation is no place for the light of heart, that's for sure. The latest scandal involves 20-year chief Suzan Evans, the loyal administrator who despite much criticism has carried out Jann Wenner's whims without fail.

Now Evans has been rudely disposed by Wenner and replaced by an executive from Clear Channel Communications. So much for loyalty. But then again, Wenner is famous for hiring and firing magazine editors all the time. It's a wonder he took this long to dump Evans.

"Jann Wenner is a terrible person," says a foundation insider. "Suzan is very upset."