If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS Boston)   Rolling Stone magazine responds to outrage over new cover, says it "falls within the traditions of journalism." They apparently forgot the word "yellow" in there   (boston.cbslocal.com) divider line 282
    More: Followup, Rolling Stones, journalisms, traditions  
•       •       •

10959 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Jul 2013 at 6:33 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



282 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-17 06:55:40 PM  

master of unlocking: cman: I hate to be that guy, and I can't believe I am that guy, but something tells me that if that dude was black no one would care if he was on the cover

yea. I think that's sort of the point, that evil bastards don't always look like the scary people some people expect. I also think understanding what makes someone do something so heinous is worth looking into.


Especially since the freaking blurb indicates the article is about "just your average, good kid" who went horribly wrong.

"Wah! They should have been more like FOX News and make the guy look as bad as possible! Like THIS!"

images.teamsugar.com

Also, subby: next time, look up "yellow journalism" before you use the phrase; you obviously have no idea what it means.
 
2013-07-17 06:56:08 PM  

HaywoodJablonski: I saw the cover. Please explain why I should be outraged


It makes it seem like if you're a badass terrorist with killer bone structure, you'll end up as a rock star on the cover of the Rolling Stone. Seriously that's pretty much what the guy on CNN just said.
 
2013-07-17 06:56:19 PM  
Can anyone tell me why we're all supposed to be outraged?
 
2013-07-17 06:56:28 PM  
Can't wait for his cookbook.
 
2013-07-17 06:57:06 PM  
No one is more about freedom of the press than I am, but isn't putting the face of an attempted mass-murderer on an influential magazine a bad choice?  There was a decent video for the media that came out a few years back from Britain that pretty much spelled out that after a mass shooting you do not show police cars with sirens on and you do not put the alleged killer's face all over the news and TV screens. Things of that nature. Their reasoning was images like that getting wide attention serve to inspire the next round of psychos.

Whether if that's true or not I have no idea.
 
2013-07-17 06:57:14 PM  
I don't get why people are outraged about this. Especially when the exact same photograph has already been used in other publications.
 
2013-07-17 06:57:21 PM  

shoegaze99: At the very least it's a sympathetic cover.


As noted, the blurb on the cover seems to indicate the article is sympathetic. Be kinda silly to say "he really was a good kid before..." and then only portray him as a monster.
 
2013-07-17 06:57:36 PM  
I especially enjoy how you can tell just from the cover that he's totally a victim and had no control over his actions. "failed by his family" and "fell into radical islam". Oh, oops, just fell right in. No control.
 
2013-07-17 06:58:18 PM  

ongbok: tenpoundsofcheese: cannotsuggestaname: netizencain: How many other RS covers featured mass murders?

I can think of the Charles Manson cover.

Now can you think of how many people Manson actually murdered?

You actually are going to go with this dumbass argument?

But coming from you, what else should we expect.


Only the truth.

Why so butthurt?  You okay?
 
2013-07-17 06:58:50 PM  

Godscrack: Next month:

imageshack.us

I for one welcome Rolling Stones your Slipper Slope. Sex sells with a smile!
cdn.ph.upi.comimg.timeinc.net
 
2013-07-17 06:59:08 PM  

uncleacid: Can't wait for his cookbook.


I dunno. All his recipes say, "Serves 626,000 (est.)".
 
2013-07-17 06:59:14 PM  
Gotta do something to beat Golf Digest in circulation.
 
2013-07-17 06:59:52 PM  

God-is-a-Taco: Also, I'm gonna buy five copies for his mother


This.
 
2013-07-17 07:00:30 PM  

Alphakronik: The conservatards played right into RS's hands on this one.

Bravo!


You have nothing better to do than make this a "conservative v liberal" thing or what?  I fail to see how this is a issue to do with either side. Care to enlighten us on how you know every outraged person is a conservative or are you just too dumb that your brain literally can't handle the fact that this has nothing to do with one side being outraged. I presume you say stuff like this just so you can sit there stroking your own cock while looking in a mirror thinking about how superior you are to everyone else.
 
2013-07-17 07:01:11 PM  

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: HaywoodJablonski: I saw the cover. Please explain why I should be outraged

It makes it seem like if you're a badass terrorist with killer bone structure, you'll end up as a rock star on the cover of the Rolling Stone. Seriously that's pretty much what the guy on CNN just said.


I'll buy that. I say all terrorists should get a cover on Redbook. That should put an end to it.
 
2013-07-17 07:01:46 PM  

SevenizGud: Walking dead man problems.

Wenner is still a dick.


Nah, he won't get the death penalty and nobody should want him to.

What instead they should say at his sentencing is the following. "Mr. jihad (SIC), you've been found guilty of Cap. Murd. 1 to the 1th degree, but however, due to the fact that you are so young...so supple and sultry, we condemn you to getting way, way, way, way over that."

And may allah have no mercy oer your scumbag pos soul.
 
2013-07-17 07:02:12 PM  

SilentStrider: Am I the only one who thinks he looks a little like Kit Harrington?


confused and stupid?

/ you know nothing etc
/ Jon Snow does have a dumbass look on his face most of the time
 
2013-07-17 07:02:42 PM  

untaken_name: I especially enjoy how you can tell just from the cover that he's totally a victim and had no control over his actions. "failed by his family" and "fell into radical islam". Oh, oops, just fell right in. No control.


God forbid we take a nuanced and objective look at how average people can be turned to radicalism.

I'm sure his first words were a cry for Chechan freedom.
 
2013-07-17 07:03:32 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: shoegaze99: At the very least it's a sympathetic cover.

As noted, the blurb on the cover seems to indicate the article is sympathetic. Be kinda silly to say "he really was a good kid before..." and then only portray him as a monster.


Well, was he considered a good kid prior to the Boston Marathon bombings? If so, I'm still not sure why there's outrage.
 
2013-07-17 07:03:47 PM  
You know, not everything in the world has to make you feel good. It's ok to have things out there you don't feel so great about.
 
2013-07-17 07:04:20 PM  

HaywoodJablonski: I saw the cover. Please explain why I should be outraged




Because Boston has gone Stage 4 Guliani.
 
2013-07-17 07:04:23 PM  

Wadded Beef: No one is more about freedom of the press than I am, but isn't putting the face of an attempted mass-murderer on an influential magazine a bad choice?  There was a decent video for the media that came out a few years back from Britain that pretty much spelled out that after a mass shooting you do not show police cars with sirens on and you do not put the alleged killer's face all over the news and TV screens. Things of that nature. Their reasoning was images like that getting wide attention serve to inspire the next round of psychos.

Whether if that's true or not I have no idea.


But then you have arguments of censorship, etc. And, let's face it, in today's world, the guy's face is gonna get out, even if it's Twitter at first. Someone, somewhere, will have a photo or three, upload them, and then every online site will be showing them (even if those sites are crapfests like The Smoking Gun or TMZ). And people will flock to those sites and the more legitimate sources will lose out.

Because people (the populace in general) want the spectacle. They want to see the train wreck / plane crash / car accident.

So it's a toss-up: give 'em what they want and make money, or have some integrity and lose out.

Rock / hard place.
 
2013-07-17 07:04:30 PM  

Tommy Moo: This stupid cover pic plays into the retarded teenage girls who are insisting he's innocent because "he's cute."


I'm neither a teen girl nor retarded (well, possibly borderline), but I, too, insist that he is innocent. He hasn't been convicted, you see.
 
2013-07-17 07:05:02 PM  
That cover is just as bad as this:

img15.imageshack.us

Damn it Rolling Stones, we all expect better from you!
 
2013-07-17 07:05:15 PM  

God-is-a-Taco: Also, I'm gonna buy five copies for my mother


"Why?"

"In case she wants to read it more than once."
 
2013-07-17 07:05:29 PM  

FlashHarry: netizencain: How many other RS covers featured mass murders?

was bush ever on the cover?


Looks like it...
assets.rollingstone.com

And they have Obama covered too...
assets.rollingstone.com
 
2013-07-17 07:05:35 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: shoegaze99: At the very least it's a sympathetic cover.

As noted, the blurb on the cover seems to indicate the article is sympathetic. Be kinda silly to say "he really was a good kid before..." and then only portray him as a monster.


I don't see why anyone would have sympathy for that devil.
 
2013-07-17 07:05:38 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: shoegaze99: At the very least it's a sympathetic cover.

As noted, the blurb on the cover seems to indicate the article is sympathetic. Be kinda silly to say "he really was a good kid before..." and then only portray him as a monster.


I don't think it's being "sympathetic" to show how a formerly good kid turned into a murdering terrorist.Before this, he wasn't all that different than most kids his age. I mean, that's the source of everyone's outrage: that he looked like a relatively normal kid. But then something changed and he went full jihadi.

People always want to think that terrorists are, and always have been evil, and look like one of those guys from the THIS IS AN OUTRAGE meme, when pretty much anyone, given the proper motivation can turn into a monster. It wouldn't be any different than doing a story about how Tim McVeigh, went from being a patriotic soldier into one of the worst monsters in American history and showing a picture of him from when he was serving
 
2013-07-17 07:06:01 PM  

SilentStrider: Am I the only one who thinks he looks a little like Kit Harrington?


I don't know. I do know that if he'd had Ygritte to occupy his attention he wouldn't have had the time or the energy for any Jihad shenanigans.
 
2013-07-17 07:06:10 PM  

untaken_name: I especially enjoy how you can tell just from the cover that he's totally a victim and had no control over his actions. "failed by his family" and "fell into radical islam". Oh, oops, just fell right in. No control.


That is why you need to hold on to the handrails at all times.

It is a pathetic cover and the text only makes it worse.

How about "Why did this farkward decide to kill and injure so many people?"

Next up, some politician commenting that the child could have been his son.
 
2013-07-17 07:06:23 PM  

cowgirl toffee: That cover is just as bad as this:



Damn it Rolling Stones, we all expect better from you!


That lesbian has no boobs.
 
2013-07-17 07:07:31 PM  
Here's the problem as I see it . . .


i1139.photobucket.com
 
2013-07-17 07:07:43 PM  

fusillade762: I don't see why anyone would have sympathy for that devil.


Ooo, the subtle triple play. Nice.
 
2013-07-17 07:08:36 PM  

Bontesla: cowgirl toffee: ...

That lesbian has no boobs.


I know. That girl in Hanson looks a lot prettier.
 
2013-07-17 07:08:46 PM  
I don't get the outrage either.  He's not the first bad guy on the cover of a magazine, and won't be the last.

I did find it interesting that Fox News was bloviating in horror that a national publication would use this picture to help tell their story.  Of course to tell their story, Fox News used the same image.

Somehow it's terrible for the Rolling Stone to use the picture, but fair and balanced when Fox does.
 
2013-07-17 07:10:16 PM  
"coverage of the most important political and cultural issues of our day"

Two idiots who made some homemade bombs and blew shiat up for no real reason whatsoever (except for the rampant stupidity in their own heads) is in no way one of the "most important political and cultural issues of our day".

Nice attempt at trolling for attention, Rolling Stone.  Enjoy your ride down to online-only and then oblivion.
 
2013-07-17 07:10:39 PM  

mouschi: Alphakronik: The conservatards played right into RS's hands on this one.

Bravo!

You have nothing better to do than make this a "conservative v liberal" thing or what?  I fail to see how this is a issue to do with either side. Care to enlighten us on how you know every outraged person is a conservative or are you just too dumb that your brain literally can't handle the fact that this has nothing to do with one side being outraged. I presume you say stuff like this just so you can sit there stroking your own cock while looking in a mirror thinking about how superior you are to everyone else.


But it is.  I've been listening to both NPR and Fox radio for the past week, and only one of them won't let this drop, and it's not the pinko-libtards.

Turn on the news, and it's the same thing.  Until you've gone ahead and dug up some sort of counter argument that has more basis in reality than "y u wanna make this into lib v conservative thing", keep reading.  Eventually you might catch on.   Glenn Beck, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Larson, ect all have been going off about it for days now.

Either have the party stfu, or don't get pissed when we laugh at you.
 
2013-07-17 07:11:11 PM  

Test Tickles: Here's the problem as I see it . . .


I've read his tweets. Trust me - he ain't no Dylan.

/lookalikes be dammed
 
2013-07-17 07:13:15 PM  

kevinfra: I don't get the outrage either.  He's not the first bad guy on the cover of a magazine, and won't be the last.

I did find it interesting that Fox News was bloviating in horror that a national publication would use this picture to help tell their story.  Of course to tell their story, Fox News used the same image.

Somehow it's terrible for the Rolling Stone to use the picture, but fair and balanced when Fox does.


People are just upset that an image on a magazine is forcing their reactionary and rigid brains to humanize a human being who is also a terrorist. They can't hold two separate and seemingly (but ultimately not) contradictory thoughts at the same time because it makes them uncomfortable. It's easier if the guy is just a bloodthirsty sociopath, and blows apart their internal philosophy of us good, them bad.
 
2013-07-17 07:13:50 PM  

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: "coverage of the most important political and cultural issues of our day"

Two idiots who made some homemade bombs and blew shiat up for no real reason whatsoever (except for the rampant stupidity in their own heads) is in no way one of the "most important political and cultural issues of our day".

Nice attempt at trolling for attention, Rolling Stone.  Enjoy your ride down to online-only and then oblivion.


For a country that's involved in a war on terror, I'd think a piece examining what leads someone to become a terrorist is clearly one of the most important political issues of the day.
 
2013-07-17 07:14:23 PM  
You know who  should've been on the covers of the biggest mags was that poor, misunderstood Adam Lanza boy.

After his poor mom divorced they were never the same, poor things.
 
2013-07-17 07:14:26 PM  
They are just playing to their audience.
The left will eat this up...."oh, poor innocent child, failed by his parents and fell into radical islam."
The right will cancel their non-existing subscriptions.
 
2013-07-17 07:15:32 PM  
Don't buy the fookin mag.

Problem Solved
 
2013-07-17 07:16:27 PM  

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: kevinfra: I don't get the outrage either.  He's not the first bad guy on the cover of a magazine, and won't be the last.

I did find it interesting that Fox News was bloviating in horror that a national publication would use this picture to help tell their story.  Of course to tell their story, Fox News used the same image.

Somehow it's terrible for the Rolling Stone to use the picture, but fair and balanced when Fox does.

People are just upset that an image on a magazine is forcing their reactionary and rigid brains to humanize a human being who is also a terrorist. They can't hold two separate and seemingly (but ultimately not) contradictory thoughts at the same time because it makes them uncomfortable. It's easier if the guy is just a bloodthirsty sociopath, and blows apart their internal philosophy of us good, them bad.


OOOOR  they think making celebrities out of people who do this help in pushing the next psycho who wants his day to do it, but your "people are sooooo stupid" typed with long fancy words works too.
 
2013-07-17 07:17:17 PM  

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: kevinfra: I don't get the outrage either.  He's not the first bad guy on the cover of a magazine, and won't be the last.

I did find it interesting that Fox News was bloviating in horror that a national publication would use this picture to help tell their story.  Of course to tell their story, Fox News used the same image.

Somehow it's terrible for the Rolling Stone to use the picture, but fair and balanced when Fox does.

People are just upset that an image on a magazine is forcing their reactionary and rigid brains to humanize a human being who is also a terrorist. They can't hold two separate and seemingly (but ultimately not) contradictory thoughts at the same time because it makes them uncomfortable. It's easier if the guy is just a bloodthirsty sociopath, and blows apart their internal philosophy of us good, them bad.


So, those outraged may have trouble holding complex thought.

Twitter supports your hypothesis.
 
2013-07-17 07:17:29 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: They are just playing to their audience.
The left will eat this up...."oh, poor innocent child, failed by his parents and fell into radical islam."
The right will cancel their non-existing subscriptions.


The audience for Rolling Stone is Baby Boomers who think music stopped being groundbreaking around 1979. I'm not sure how the old guy down at the bar with his hair in a ponytail votes.
 
2013-07-17 07:18:32 PM  

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: "coverage of the most important political and cultural issues of our day"

Two idiots who made some homemade bombs and blew shiat up for no real reason whatsoever (except for the rampant stupidity in their own heads) is in no way one of the "most important political and cultural issues of our day".


But two idiots who made some homemade bombs and blew shiat up for possibly politically reasons and held a city hostage to fear and captivated a nation with the spectacle is.

Especially when their is an ongoing FBI investigation into the death (while in questioning) of a "Tsarnaev associate".

But hey. Opinion, man.
 
2013-07-17 07:18:33 PM  

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: "coverage of the most important political and cultural issues of our day"

Two idiots who made some homemade bombs and blew shiat up for no real reason whatsoever (except for the rampant stupidity in their own heads) is in no way one of the "most important political and cultural issues of our day".

Nice attempt at trolling for attention, Rolling Stone.  Enjoy your ride down to online-only and then oblivion.


Actually how a person who was normal by accounts of people who knew him could turn into a radicalized mass murderer is definitely a pretty important cultural issues and maybe political issue. If you don't think so I would like to know what you think is an important cultural or political issue.
 
2013-07-17 07:18:57 PM  
WTF is with people.

Nobody cares about your stupid outrage. If a RS cover affects you so much, you are pathetic and need a hobby or something.

It's like people are just always looking around for the latest outrage, the latest "affront".

Puritans....
 
2013-07-17 07:19:04 PM  

mouschi: Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: kevinfra: I don't get the outrage either.  He's not the first bad guy on the cover of a magazine, and won't be the last.

I did find it interesting that Fox News was bloviating in horror that a national publication would use this picture to help tell their story.  Of course to tell their story, Fox News used the same image.

Somehow it's terrible for the Rolling Stone to use the picture, but fair and balanced when Fox does.

People are just upset that an image on a magazine is forcing their reactionary and rigid brains to humanize a human being who is also a terrorist. They can't hold two separate and seemingly (but ultimately not) contradictory thoughts at the same time because it makes them uncomfortable. It's easier if the guy is just a bloodthirsty sociopath, and blows apart their internal philosophy of us good, them bad.

OOOOR  they think making celebrities out of people who do this help in pushing the next psycho who wants his day to do it, but your "people are sooooo stupid" typed with long fancy words works too.


I'm pretty sure that Rolling Stones isn't going to make this guy any more famous than he already is. How the hell could they make a celebrity out of him?
 
Displayed 50 of 282 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report