Rolling Stone blasted for giving rock star treatment to accused Boston bomber

  • WhoDey

    Posts: 561

    Jul 18, 2013 5:25 AM GMT
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/17/rolling-stone-features-boston-bombing-suspect-dzhokhar-tsarnaev-on-cover/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2013 5:27 AM GMT
    Gotta sell magazines somehow, right? icon_neutral.gif

    kQ0lKFN.jpg

    NPR interview with Rolling Stones editor. When asked if he would do something like this again, he chuckled. And then caught himself, got serious, and said he would. icon_rolleyes.gif

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/07/17/202956379/rolling-stones-tsarnaev-cover-whats-stirring-such-passion
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Jul 18, 2013 5:32 AM GMT
    Usually the cover is reserve for some one cool ... so I don't understand their thinking ... I see it as just spitting in the face of Americans
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2013 5:44 AM GMT
    brokebackpoundin saidman, i'm sorry BUT they picked the wrong photo for that guy. why they had to pick out the best looking photo for him? let him look demonic. in that pic, he just looks sexy and it's hard not to get giggly seeing his face. i'm ashamed to say that. icon_sad.gif


    I'm ashamed of The Way you said it. . .
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2013 5:59 AM GMT
    brokebackpoundin saidman, i'm sorry BUT they picked the wrong photo for that guy. why they had to pick out the best looking photo for him? let him look demonic. in that pic, he just looks sexy and it's hard not to get giggly seeing his face. i'm ashamed to say that. icon_sad.gif


    He does look sexy as fuck in that picture. I'd let him hit.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2013 6:00 AM GMT
    brokebackpoundin said
    TheRece25 said
    brokebackpoundin saidman, i'm sorry BUT they picked the wrong photo for that guy. why they had to pick out the best looking photo for him? let him look demonic. in that pic, he just looks sexy and it's hard not to get giggly seeing his face. i'm ashamed to say that. icon_sad.gif


    I'm ashamed of The Way you said it. . .


    he's an evil son of a bitch BUT i'm not gonna take away the sexy tag from him. in no way am i saying that because he's sexy, that changes the fact that he's a monster.


    I did not say what you said.. I said the way you said it... lol
  • TheBizMan

    Posts: 4091

    Jul 18, 2013 6:09 AM GMT
    I'm actually much more interested in David J. Leonard's take on the whole issue ( second link)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2013 6:11 AM GMT


    Look at an old Stone cover showing Charles Manson. There were people then that found the pic attractive.
    It's the article that's important.

    (personally I find the pic of the bomber not attractive at all)

  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Jul 18, 2013 6:21 AM GMT
    I can see why people are upset, but the article is about how a smart beautiful kid who had it all became a monster and a terrorist. Beauty can be a mask for ugliness underneath. Osama Bin Laden was on the cover of countless magazine's. Charles Manson was on the cover of Rolling Stone. This pic is a selfie. It's real. It's not made up, or glamorizing terrorism, yet what it reveals is fascinating and disturbing: the fact that people are overreacting only underlines how manipulated people let themselves get by beauty. There are evil people in the world, and this article is purportedly designed to get to the bottom of it. Journalism is meant to expose the truth, and the truth here is that a kid who looks like some ideal is absolutely grotesque.

    That's my initial reaction to it. I'm personally not as susceptible to pictures as some people apparently are, and I also value the whole truth. I'm curious about the article and the reactions people are having to the cover. In an age when we bemoan racial profiling, its interesting to see how a superficial culture that pushes beauty now wants to censor it. It's true what they say, it's shortsighted to always judge books, and magazines, by their covers.
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Jul 18, 2013 6:23 AM GMT
    He looks pretty on the cover ... and in prison, I'll bet they'll think he's got a pretty little ass too icon_twisted.gif
  • TheBizMan

    Posts: 4091

    Jul 18, 2013 6:24 AM GMT
    HottJoe saidI can see why people are upset, but the article is about how a smart beautiful kid who had it all became a monster and a terrorist. Beauty can be a mask for ugliness underneath. Osama Bin Laden was on the cover of countless magazine's. Charles Manson was on the cover of Rolling Stone. This pic is a selfie. It's real. It's not made up, or glamorizing terrorism, yet what it reveals is fascinating and disturbing: the fact that people are overreacting only underlines how manipulated people let themselves get by beauty. There are evil people in the world, and this article is purportedly designed to get to the bottom of it. Journalism is meant to expose the truth, and the truth here is that a kid who looks like some ideal is absolutely grotesque.

    That's my initial reaction to it. I'm personally not as susceptible to pictures as some people apparently are, and I also value the whole truth. I'm curious about the article and the reactions people are having to the cover. In an age when we bemoan racial profiling, its interesting to see how a superficial culture that pushes beauty now wants to censor it. It's true what they say, it's shortsighted to always judge books, and magazines, by their covers.


    You should read the article posted by xrichx.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Jul 18, 2013 6:25 AM GMT
    AMoonHawk saidHe looks pretty on the cover ... and in prison, I'll bet they'll think he's got a pretty little ass too icon_twisted.gif

    He's not going to that kind of prison. I'm guessing he's not looking so hot these days...
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Jul 18, 2013 6:27 AM GMT
    I can't understand the uproar over this magazine cover.
    "Rock star treatment ?"
    That's ridiculous.
    Rolling Stone is more than just a magazine about music and musicians.

    I would love to read more about this young man, and find out about his life in Russia, his life in America, and what happened along the way to turn him into a terrorist. I'd like to know what he has to say, now.

  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Jul 18, 2013 6:29 AM GMT
    brokebackpoundin saidman, i'm sorry BUT they picked the wrong photo for that guy. why they had to pick out the best looking photo for him? let him look demonic. in that pic, he just looks sexy and it's hard not to get giggly seeing his face. i'm ashamed to say that. icon_sad.gif



    Very interesting comments.
    And, I think that's the irony: how could that sweet looking boy be a terrorist ? It makes me want to know more about him.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Jul 18, 2013 6:31 AM GMT
    AMoonHawk saidUsually the cover is reserve for some one cool ... so I don't understand their thinking ... I see it as just spitting in the face of Americans



    It's just a picture, for heaven sakes.
    No one's praising him or giving him an award.
    It's an interview, along with a picture of him.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Jul 18, 2013 6:54 AM GMT
    TheBizMan said
    HottJoe saidI can see why people are upset, but the article is about how a smart beautiful kid who had it all became a monster and a terrorist. Beauty can be a mask for ugliness underneath. Osama Bin Laden was on the cover of countless magazine's. Charles Manson was on the cover of Rolling Stone. This pic is a selfie. It's real. It's not made up, or glamorizing terrorism, yet what it reveals is fascinating and disturbing: the fact that people are overreacting only underlines how manipulated people let themselves get by beauty. There are evil people in the world, and this article is purportedly designed to get to the bottom of it. Journalism is meant to expose the truth, and the truth here is that a kid who looks like some ideal is absolutely grotesque.

    That's my initial reaction to it. I'm personally not as susceptible to pictures as some people apparently are, and I also value the whole truth. I'm curious about the article and the reactions people are having to the cover. In an age when we bemoan racial profiling, its interesting to see how a superficial culture that pushes beauty now wants to censor it. It's true what they say, it's shortsighted to always judge books, and magazines, by their covers.


    You should read the article posted by xrichx.

    That article pretty much sums up what I've been posting about in numerous political threads. Look at how superficially people view the world: when a suburban white male commits a crime, the media, catering to the desires of the masses, paint them as mentally ill, and ask what went wrong, and act almost sympathetic, like the monster needed help. Osama Bin Laden was on far more covers, but he didn't look like America's boy next door. People just can't handle the so called boy next door being evil to the core. They're blaming the magazine, the messenger, for using the kid's self taken photos. They can't seem to see how superficial they're being. The article is purportedly a piece of well researched hard journalism. We'll have to wait and see what it says, and what it says about privileged kids who are are anything but perfect angels.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2013 7:03 AM GMT
    HottJoe said
    TheBizMan said
    HottJoe saidI can see why people are upset, but the article is about how a smart beautiful kid who had it all became a monster and a terrorist. Beauty can be a mask for ugliness underneath. Osama Bin Laden was on the cover of countless magazine's. Charles Manson was on the cover of Rolling Stone. This pic is a selfie. It's real. It's not made up, or glamorizing terrorism, yet what it reveals is fascinating and disturbing: the fact that people are overreacting only underlines how manipulated people let themselves get by beauty. There are evil people in the world, and this article is purportedly designed to get to the bottom of it. Journalism is meant to expose the truth, and the truth here is that a kid who looks like some ideal is absolutely grotesque.

    That's my initial reaction to it. I'm personally not as susceptible to pictures as some people apparently are, and I also value the whole truth. I'm curious about the article and the reactions people are having to the cover. In an age when we bemoan racial profiling, its interesting to see how a superficial culture that pushes beauty now wants to censor it. It's true what they say, it's shortsighted to always judge books, and magazines, by their covers.


    You should read the article posted by xrichx.

    That article pretty much sums up what I've been posting about in numerous political threads. Look at how superficially people view the world: when a suburban white male commits a crime, the media, catering to the desires of the masses, paint them as mentally ill, and ask what went wrong, and act almost sympathetic, like the monster needed help. Osama Bin Laden was on far more covers, but he didn't look like America's boy next door. People just can't handle the so called boy next door being evil to the core. They're blaming the magazine, the messenger, for using the kid's self taken photos. They can't seem to see how superficial they're being. The article is purportedly a piece of well researched hard journalism. We'll have to wait and see what it says, and what it says about privileged kids who are are anything but perfect angels.


    Attractive Joseph have I ever told you how much I love you? What you said was exactly right. Look at the James Holmes guy. Everyone is wondering why he did what he did. Everyone is trying to get into his mind. But when a black person shoots some people it's their nature. When a Latino does it it's a reason why they are bringing down our communities. It goes beyond attractiveness and race sometimes too. If Jethro or Jim Bob were to kill someone I doubt there would be a big analyization of his pysche either.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2013 7:09 AM GMT
    Webster666 saidI can't understand the uproar over this magazine cover.
    "Rock star treatment ?"
    That's ridiculous.
    Rolling Stone is more than just a magazine about music and musicians.

    I would love to read more about this young man, and find out about his life in Russia, his life in America, and what happened along the way to turn him into a terrorist. I'd like to know what he has to say, now.



    If you want to read more about this young man, you should google him or when someone publish a biography on him later, buy that book! You don't read about this *terrorist who bombed Boston through a major US music magazine.

    I'm sorry but I find this is crap and tasteless on Rolling Stone part. I used to subscribed and get my music news through RL, when I think of the magazine, I associate it with Bob Dylan, Britney Spears, Justin Timberlake and all other great musicians on the cover. Not some weirdo 19 yo terrorist who wanted to bomb America. (It just doesn't connect the dot to me A Terrorist on a major Music/Rock magazine cover). icon_evil.gif

    I think this is RL's publicity stunt and a way to get attention to raise their sagging sales.

    Here's an idea for your next cover RL: Emerging Asian music acts taking over America !! icon_twisted.gif

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2013 7:10 AM GMT
    People are uncomfortable because he's a terrorist, but he has an attractive face, and it makes them come head to head with the fact that physical attractiveness inherently gives people privileges/free passes etc. Obviously in this case that's not going to work, but they still have the visceral reaction of "that's a horrible person...but..wait...he's attractive so doesn't that mean something too?"
  • Generaleclect...

    Posts: 504

    Jul 18, 2013 8:20 AM GMT
    Am I the only one who doesn't see what all the hype is about (with Tsarnaev's looks?) icon_neutral.gif

    But yeah, like someone else here hinted: he doesn't get treated much like a criminal - more like a victim - because he has the "complexion for the protection." Lol.
  • WhoDey

    Posts: 561

    Jul 18, 2013 4:20 PM GMT
    http://www.thelineofbestfit.com/news/latest-news/boston-mayor-menino-writes-letter-to-rolling-stone-publisher-in-response-to-cover-featuring-boston-marathon-terrorist-130861
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Jul 18, 2013 4:28 PM GMT
    WhoDey saidhttp://www.thelineofbestfit.com/news/latest-news/boston-mayor-menino-writes-letter-to-rolling-stone-publisher-in-response-to-cover-featuring-boston-marathon-terrorist-130861

    No one writes letters like that when Osama Bin Laden is on a magazine cover.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2013 4:41 PM GMT
    Matiz saidPeople are uncomfortable because he's a terrorist, but he has an attractive face, and it makes them come head to head with the fact that physical attractiveness inherently gives people privileges/free passes etc. Obviously in this case that's not going to work, but they still have the visceral reaction of "that's a horrible person...but..wait...he's attractive so doesn't that mean something too?"


    Too many forget that old idiom,
    "Handsome is as handsome DOES"

    I've noticed over the years that there is a horrible mindset out there that attractive appearance equals nice person; plain or less than plain equals not nice person.
    I made that mistake when I was a child, dear god what a lesson I learned.
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Jul 18, 2013 4:58 PM GMT
    Cute fades, but what annoys me most is that RS basically glorified this guy by putting him on the cover for other would be terrorists .... that's exactly the publicity they want
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 18, 2013 6:16 PM GMT
    Didn't he get shot up bad?? Yeah he isn't cute at all anymore.. haha get over that part