where's martin's? Boston bomber on the cover of the Rolling Stones

[zako85]

And yet, this makes me ask one, simple question: did anyone actually read the article, in it's entirety, and then comment about it? With 'on the street' interviews, what one gleans from the participants is 'no, they didn't', making all this hubbub about the cover of said magazine nothing more than an exercise in faux-intellectualism.

I did not read the article, but I find it reprehensible for a magazine to use a scandalous cover image to entice people to read its articles.

[zako85]

What's the big deal? It's just a picture.

It's not an ordinary picture. It's a glamorization of a vicious terrorist with innocent blood on his hands.

[gadjo_dilo]

It's not an ordinary picture. It's a glamorization of a vicious terrorist with innocent blood on his hands.

Why is a cover of a. magazine a glamorization?

[vhatever]

Why is a cover of a. magazine a glamorization?

I don't think it's the cover itself, but the picture they chose. Also, i think the only known major criminal the Rolling stone had put on their cover before was Charles Manson. They didn't even use a picture for that, but had some kind of drawing.

[gadjo_dilo]

I don't think it's the cover itself, but the picture .

Come on........Last night I discussed this issue with some friends and one of them said that Tsarnaev has a very interesting and romantic face and this impressed him from the first moment.
But of course it doesn't mean he wasn't horrified of what T did or that he's tempted to follow his example.
I mean can't we see the facts through the filter of our intelligence? ( now I'm talking about the rest oof you 'cos definitely I lack this one ).

[airshifter]

Come on........Last night I discussed this issue with some friends and one of them said that Tsarnaev has a very interesting and romantic face and this impressed him from the first moment.
But of course it doesn't mean he wasn't horrified of what T did or that he's tempted to follow his example.
I mean can't we see the facts through the filter of our intelligence? ( now I'm talking about the rest oof you 'cos definitely I lack this one ).

It seems quite a few are offended for different reasons. I've heard that many are upset as they are trying to portray him as a "normal" guy. There was a story on the Yahoo home page about how many would have preferred to see him as seen during his arrest... tired, hiding, and with red laser dots on his forehead.

To me it really doesn't matter much what picture they used. I would have preferred what we never learned his name, his life story, motivations, etc. I think a lot of these wackos these days want the "fame" more than they want to do something for a real cause they are behind. As such, robbing them of being recognized might actually lower the rate that these things happen at. But if not... I still don't really care about the story behind that motivates them to do such things. Let me know that they were caught, and when they are executed as far as I'm concerned.

Not that I would pay money for Rolling Stone... hell we rejected them when they were free!

[ioan]

There was a story on the Yahoo home page about how many would have preferred to see him as seen during his arrest... tired, hiding, and with red laser dots on his forehead.

Signs of a sick society.

[vhatever]

Signs of a sick society.

Though I'm sure its a few notches removed from the insanity of killing cartoonists when people don't like the pictures they draw.

[markabilly]

And yet, this makes me ask one, simple question: did anyone actually read the article, in it's entirety, and then comment about it? With 'on the street' interviews, what one gleans from the participants is 'no, they didn't', making all this hubbub about the cover of said magazine nothing more than an exercise in faux-intellectualism.

I have, and it is an attempt, a poor sloppy attempt, to try to make him out as not-such-a-bad person, after-all-he-is-human-too kinda of thing. I stole the read by skimming through it at a local magazine/news/bookstore and left it on the shelf. The next day, I went back and all the copies previously on the shelf were gone. When I commented that it must have been a hot item to be going so fast, the guy who runs the store, said no, did not sell, and he got tired at looking at "the stupid photo", so he sent them back to the distributor, who took them back without fussing. He said, 50 copies delivered and four days later, 50 copies returned.

[Starter]

Come on........Last night I discussed this issue with some friends and one of them said that Tsarnaev has a very interesting and romantic face and this impressed him from the first moment.
But of course it doesn't mean he wasn't horrified of what T did or that he's tempted to follow his example.
I mean can't we see the facts through the filter of our intelligence? ( now I'm talking about the rest oof you 'cos definitely I lack this one ).

You missed the point. Anything which seems to glamorize or promote fame has an appeal to some very sick individuals who then wish to have their "moment of glory" by performing a copycat act. Granted that those individuals are in the small minority, but it only took one recently radicalized Islamist and a hero worshiping younger brother to change forever or end the lives of a large number of people in Boston. Giving those kinds of people free publicity is not in anyone's best interest.