RollingStone crossed the line imo

[El Kabong]

Rolling Stone Piece -- in 50 Seconds

Greg Gutfeld summarizes the Rolling Stone piece

[El Kabong]

An interesting (yet now deleted) Tweet from Rolling Stone's editor

'@'Christianhoard "I guess we should have drawn a dick on Dzhokhar's face or something?"

[IamInuit]

Seriously what happened to "common sense"? Where did it go and when is it coming back? Its certainly no longer common. Ok so news print is dying the death of a thousand cuts and they need to sell issues but at what cost morally? As a struggling utilitarian I believe profit has become some kind of omnipotent eternal nightmare.

Here is an idea in the next issue how about you put that butcher psychopath who cut that British soldiers head off in broad daylight on the cover in a Polo shirt, holding a bottle of Jack Daniels with and ad for Cold Plays next cry me a river record underneath it?

[Gandalf]

It's an overreaction. Lyle, knows that I watch Piers Morgan and some guy who hated the cover was asked 'Have you read the article'. His response was basically: 'No, the picture is enough'. It is such a shallow attitude and why they were even interviewing this man was a bit pathetic. It's just an image and how the guy looked. He is on the front of a magazine. Read it for gods sake and then decide. Personally, I can see why they did it, think it was a good job, and of course it is firmly in tradition for Rolling Stone.

[El Kabong]

It's an overreaction. Lyle, knows that I watch Piers Morgan and some guy who hated the cover was asked 'Have you read the article'. His response was basically: 'No, the picture is enough'. It is such a shallow attitude and why they were even interviewing this man was a bit pathetic. It's just an image and how the guy looked. He is on the front of a magazine. Read it for gods sake and then decide. Personally, I can see why they did it, think it was a good job, and of course it is firmly in tradition for Rolling Stone.

No it's a slap in the face of people who have suffered due to the actions of that monster. Write the story by all means...but how about a picture of the BOMBING or the victims or a less "regular guy" picture of Tsarnaev? I guarantee you if they put a picture of George Zimmerman on the cover they would have made HIM look like a monster why? BECAUSE OF THEIR AGENDA...what does Rolling Stone want the reader to take away from this story? Tsarnaev was an easy going every day average dude who smoked pot and was the typical Rolling Stone reader who somehow got into radical Islam through no fault of his own.

With issues like this there are certain people who ALWAYS look in the mirror...."Well surely this happened because of something I/WE/America did wrong....let's navel gaze a bit and see if we can't figure out why"...fuck that attitude, some people CHOOSE to be bad, they CHOOSE to break the law, they CHOOSE to kill, to murder, to attack, and they don't need a reason or some life changing event to get them headed down that road.

[Gandalf]

It's an overreaction. Lyle, knows that I watch Piers Morgan and some guy who hated the cover was asked 'Have you read the article'. His response was basically: 'No, the picture is enough'. It is such a shallow attitude and why they were even interviewing this man was a bit pathetic. It's just an image and how the guy looked. He is on the front of a magazine. Read it for gods sake and then decide. Personally, I can see why they did it, think it was a good job, and of course it is firmly in tradition for Rolling Stone.

No it's a slap in the face of people who have suffered due to the actions of that monster. Write the story by all means...but how about a picture of the BOMBING or the victims or a less "regular guy" picture of Tsarnaev? I guarantee you if they put a picture of George Zimmerman on the cover they would have made HIM look like a monster why? BECAUSE OF THEIR AGENDA...what does Rolling Stone want the reader to take away from this story? Tsarnaev was an easy going every day average dude who smoked pot and was the typical Rolling Stone reader who somehow got into radical Islam through no fault of his own.

With issues like this there are certain people who ALWAYS look in the mirror...."Well surely this happened because of something I/WE/America did wrong....let's navel gaze a bit and see if we can't figure out why"...fuck that attitude, some people CHOOSE to be bad, they CHOOSE to break the law, they CHOOSE to kill, to murder, to attack, and they don't need a reason or some life changing event to get them headed down that road.

Lyle, he was a human being and an image was put on the cover. It is no different to Charles Manson being on the cover. It is a story with a lot behind it and Rolling Stone fleshed it out as few others have. I don't understand the issues with an anti-hero being put on the front. The fact was for much of his life he was a likeable young chap. It is that dichotonmy that gets people all twisted up.

I think Rollingstone have done a very good job here and only those who haven't read the article will have issues with it. The article itself is very well researched and the cover is just to show the duality involved in character.

[El Kabong]

They are helping to make him a martyr and the young skulls full of mush will read the article and maybe instead of buying a Che t-shirt they'll buy a Tsarnaev one.

He is a murderer and a coward long may he rot in jail

[Britkid]

With issues like this there are certain people who ALWAYS look in the mirror...."Well surely this happened because of something I/WE/America did wrong....let's navel gaze a bit and see if we can't figure out why"...fuck that attitude, some people CHOOSE to be bad, they CHOOSE to break the law, they CHOOSE to kill, to murder, to attack, and they don't need a reason or some life changing event to get them headed down that road.

Just because it is more complicated and less straight forward to realize people do things for reasons, often outside their own control, does not make it any less truthful.

This issue is not black and white/good and bad, both sides here have areas of grey. It is not right a young child died. But that death is not entirely the fault of one individual. It is in part due to the failings of society, that this man could do such a terrible act.

To just blame one individual would be a failing of society, and will almost certainly lead to the death of another young child. If the problem is going to be solved, it first needs to be addressed...

And the fact that people on this forum no matter what their views are debating this subject, shows as well as getting a load of free advertising, The Rolling Stone magazine has helped push forward debate on the subject.