by Steve Watson via Modernity News,
Mick Jagger just delivered a masterclass in cutting through media spin, leaving a leftist New York Times podcaster visibly rattled as he clarified that his "mad mogul" lyric about Elon Musk was actually a compliment.
The Rolling Stones legend refused to play along with the expected narrative during the interview, pushing back firmly when the host, David Marchese, presumed the line was a diss.
Instead, Jagger highlighted Musk's real-world achievements in space, crediting him with stepping up where government agencies have fallen short.
Watch the NYT podcaster's face when he realizes Mick Jagger likes and respects Elon Musk—after initially thinking a new Rolling Stones song lyric was a diss:
— Julia ?? (@Jules31415) July 14, 2026
NYT: "But something's nagging at you, what is it?"
Jagger: "No, it's not nagging. It's just that people, they hear one... pic.twitter.com/UuuIgPSSyG
In the exchange, Jagger explained the context behind the lyric from the new Rolling Stones album Foreign Tongues. He pointed to the rescue of the stranded NASA astronauts last year, noting that Musk's SpaceX provided the transportation NASA couldn't.
Jagger told the interviewer: "It's not nagging, but people hear one word and they don't really listen to the line. So it's like, 'Mick Jagger has a go at Elon Musk.' You're not listening to the line, you're only listening to 'Musk.' ... even though I do call him mad."
Marchese's expression totally changed from smiling to frowning in an instant when Jagger refused to confirm the interviewer's gleeful expectation that the singer would criticise Musk.
He continued: "When I wrote that, I was thinking that because of him, they were able to get those astronauts back that were stuck because he provided the transportation because NASA couldn't provide the transportation..."
"Who would you trust to get you into space?" Jagger continued, adding "Would you trust Boeing or would you trust NASA or would you trust mad mogul Mr. Musk? It's really a side-winding compliment because he was the one I remembered was able to do that when the others couldn't."
Jagger exposed how Marchese had completely misinterpreted the lyrics of the song, making him look foolish.
The podcaster pressed on, noting Musk was the only person named on the album, implying significance.
Jagger stood his ground, adding that "mogul doesn't always go down well, either," and the host again showed how one dimensional he is by suggesting "No one likes a mogul."
Jagger was clearly exhausted with the exchange as Marchese simply refused to understand what the singer was getting at.
In another recent NYT interview, Jagger contrasted his approach to performing live with Bruce Springsteen's rabid anti-Trump activism, emphasizing that his job is to give fans a great time, not sermonize.
Jagger's nuanced expression underscores a refreshing independence in an industry often dominated by predictable elite consensus, and his clarity cuts against the grain of performative outrage.
Moments like this expose the disconnect between coastal media bubbles and ground-level realities.
The Rolling Stones continue to prove their enduring relevance not by chasing trends, but by staying true to a no-nonsense ethos that prioritizes delivery over dogma. Jagger's unapologetic take serves as a subtle rebuke to those who weaponize art for division rather than unity through great music and honest reflection.
Jagger gets it - focus on what works, entertain the audience, and let results speak louder than spin. In a free society, that kind of straight talk is exactly what keeps culture vibrant against efforts to enforce conformity.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.