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  
•       •       •

10954 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
 
2013-07-18 12:04:51 AM
Trolling Stone
 
2013-07-18 12:05:36 AM

nmemkha: Trolling Stone


I repeat, this is not a repeat.
 
2013-07-18 12:15:41 AM

ArcadianRefugee: dletter: other than saying it was a cover storyu), it is mainly the "sexified" cover photo.

This is 'sexified'?

[abcnews.go.com image 396x550]


THIS. Holy hell, if you think that's unduly sexy,  go get farking laid, you need it.
 
2013-07-18 12:23:12 AM

jayphat: Brainsick: jayphat: The problem is nobody wanted to emulate Manson, IMO. Bomberboy there will be given rockstar status by being on the cover, and you'll get people who want to copycat that to some extent. Much like with mass shootings. They are tragic, no doubt about that. But if they were regional stories that stayed that way with a little blurb on the nightly news, people would stop trying to do the exact same thing, again to an extent.

Yeah! Because no one was ever tortured, killed, or abused by their fellow humans until the rise of national media.

/getting hats to fit must be a chore, for you

The point
.
.
.
.
.
.
you


I thought your point was that national media coverage leads to copycats, which is dumb. Please, enlighten me
 
2013-07-18 12:35:53 AM
There are lots of people in this country who need to get a damn hobby.
 
2013-07-18 12:39:26 AM

PsiChick: ArcadianRefugee: dletter: other than saying it was a cover storyu), it is mainly the "sexified" cover photo.

This is 'sexified'?

[abcnews.go.com image 396x550]

THIS. Holy hell, if you think that's unduly sexy,  go get farking laid, you need it.


That's my take on this whole "controversy." Those who are the most outraged really hate the guy, but at the same time they are also attracted to him. Michelle Malkin even called it a "Tiger Beat" cover. This is bound to cause some cognitive dissonance which I believe is the source of the outrage. Otherwise, why didn't the  Boston Herald catch hell for putting James Eagan Holmes on its cover? Or Tamerlan Tsarnaev? Or Dzhokhar Tsarnaev?
 
2013-07-18 12:40:43 AM

oldtaku: The best part of this for me is all the outraged Dzhokhar Truthers on twitter, who are young women who think he's too dreamy to be guilty.


Someone I follow tweeted this: "Hey, teen girls who think Dzhokhar is cute. You know who other teen girls thought was cute? Ted Bundy."

I tweeted back: "And I hear John Wayne Gacy was a pillar of the community and a hit with the kids!"
 
2013-07-18 01:06:38 AM

netizencain: How many other RS covers featured mass murders?


GW Bush three times, Charles Manson once...there are probably more.  Did Kissinger ever make the cover?
 
2013-07-18 01:27:08 AM

ontariolightning: The singer from Disturbed says it's rolling stones fault next time a heinous act occurs but is he responsible for his own lyrics?

Bring the violence / It's significant To the lifeIf you've ever known anyone Bring the violenceIt's significant To the lifeCan you feel it?How do you sleep When you live with your liesOut of your mouth Up from your mindThat kind of thinking Starts a chain reactionYou are a timebomb ticking awayYou need to release What you're feeling insideLet out the beast That you're trying to hideStep right up and be a part of the actionGet your game face on Because it's time to playYou're pushing and fighting your wayYou're ripping it up


That being one of the few Disturbed songs I like, I think you're missing the point of the song.

/I bet you think "Stoopid" by Snot and "God Given" by NIN are racist songs
 
2013-07-18 01:44:08 AM

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

was bush ever on the cover?

Looks like it...
[assets.rollingstone.com image 367x500]

And they have Obama covered too...
[assets.rollingstone.com image 414x500]


7 times.
 
2013-07-18 01:50:08 AM

freetomato: I wonder how many magazine covers Bin Laden was on?


I don't know how many but for me, this was the last farking straw. Totally canceled my subscription.

i28.photobucket.com


Seriously though, I bet over 90% of the poutraged people threatening to boycott have never subscribed to, or even read R.S. in 30 years (or ever,) and don't even know who the fark Matt Taibbi is.
 
2013-07-18 01:55:45 AM

alabasterblack: oldtaku: The best part of this for me is all the outraged Dzhokhar Truthers on twitter, who are young women who think he's too dreamy to be guilty.

Can we round them up and put them somewhere where they won't be a danger to others?


Clamp their wombs shut. It's for the best.
 
2013-07-18 02:23:07 AM
Has anyone else read the cover article? It's available on the RS site.I liked it. Shed an eerie light back on us and the well-worn questions we still don't like to ask: how well do we know the people we know? How easily can we snap?The Tsarnaevs did a terrible thing, but dehumanizing them only takes us further away from answers.
 
2013-07-18 02:34:56 AM
No outrage from me. Rolling Stone seems to like to create controversy from time to time to keep things "edgy". I always thought they were supposed to be a music magazine but every time they're in the news it never has anything to do with music.
 
2013-07-18 02:40:14 AM

gfid: We keep gettin' richer, but we can't get our picture on the cover of the Rolling Stone!  WTF does one have to do anyway?  Bomb a major city?

Meh - I've been boycotting RS anyway ever since they stopped printing articles by HST


Uh, he killed himself. He doesn't write anymore.
 
2013-07-18 03:53:16 AM

ransack.: gfid: We keep gettin' richer, but we can't get our picture on the cover of the Rolling Stone!  WTF does one have to do anyway?  Bomb a major city?

Meh - I've been boycotting RS anyway ever since they stopped printing articles by HST

Uh, he killed himself. He doesn't write anymore.


Uh, he stopped writing for RS before he killed himself.  Alas, he loved sports too much and ESPN killed him.
 
2013-07-18 04:07:00 AM
i0.kym-cdn.com
 
2013-07-18 05:06:05 AM
Wait so what's the scandal? That he'll somehow get famous from this? Holy farking shiat if he wasn't infamous before this then I don't know what would do it.
/I have a free sub so I guess I'll be getting this in the mail.
 
2013-07-18 06:44:16 AM

Aarontology: dletter: I don't believe the complaints are about the article (which is what subby's quote was about, I am not even sure RS's response references the cover, other than saying it was a cover storyu), it is mainly the "sexified" cover photo.  Which goes directly to what subby is implying ('yellow journalism').

It's a stupid f*cking complaint from people who need to be outraged and terrified all the goddamned time.


this
 
2013-07-18 06:48:00 AM
If I had a teenage daughter who was Twitter-swooning over this sick little farkwad, I'd delete her Twitter account myself--AFTER taking away her phone and computer, and grounding her for a solid month or six. What the hell kind of parents would allow such a thing?? Does *nobody* pay attention to what their kids are saying and doing online? It's called discipline, America. When your snowflakes do dumbass, embarrassing things, you're supposed to (1) NOTICE, and (2) do something about it. //Thankful right now that my 13 year old is a plain old, garden-variety skateboard-crazy boy
 
2013-07-18 07:13:36 AM

Oktoberain: If I had a teenage daughter who was Twitter-swooning over this sick little farkwad, I'd delete her Twitter account myself--AFTER taking away her phone and computer, and grounding her for a solid month or six. What the hell kind of parents would allow such a thing?? Does *nobody* pay attention to what their kids are saying and doing online? It's called discipline, America. When your snowflakes do dumbass, embarrassing things, you're supposed to (1) NOTICE, and (2) do something about it. //Thankful right now that my 13 year old is a plain old, garden-variety skateboard-crazy boy


I'd say shoot her computer too.

I'd approve of all that, plus teaching her what a sick twisted farktwat he and his brother (and their followers) arre by showing her the carnage (And I'm the type who hates the "show kids the morgue to tell them not to drink or drive or text or fornicate in cars).

You'll either have a daughter shocked back to her senses or a hardened fanatic ready to be Jihad Squeaky Fromme for FreeHatJahar.

I like those odds.

/Bobby Brady episode with Jesse James FTW!
 
2013-07-18 07:22:20 AM
www.tooconservative.com
 
2013-07-18 07:23:40 AM

skullkrusher: Disgruntled Goat: Is this another thread where we mock Rolling Stone? Has anyone used the term "relevant" yet?  Or made a snarky comment about a print magazine's circulation numbers? 'Cause that makes you cool.
So very, very cool.

question is: more or less cool than a graying, print magazine with fading circulation numbers making a blatant attempt to stay relevant?


It's a good and relevant article, so I'd say less cool.
But why do people keep saying "print magazine" as if they're not as online?
 
2013-07-18 07:24:56 AM
The reason, as I understand it, people around the hub are upset about the cover is not just the fact that the photo is apparently a flattering one of Tsarnaev strangely reminiscent of something out of the Almost Famous, because as has been correctly pointed out, the same or similar photos of him have appeared on other publication covers.  It's more the fact that it's on Rolling Stone's cover, which is almost always reserved for celebrities, stars of music and movies, etc.  N.B. to you really old farks here, yes, an unflattering sketch of Charles Manson was apparently on the cover 20 years before 90% of Rolling Stones' current readership was born, but I'd hardly say that makes a trend.

It's not the article anyone's upset about, it's that in magazine racks in malls, book stores, pharmacies, supermarkets etc. this guy responsible for turning a day of sport, celebration and comraderie into a day of death and tragedy has a cover shot in a place where we've all been conditioned to see celebrity and stardom.  That may just sting a little bit if you happen to no longer own a pair of legs courtesy of this c*nt.

I'm not upset or outraged over it.  They can do whatever they want, it's their magazine.  But I'm not going to sit here and pretend I'm baffled at the negative response; pretend I can't at least understand why it might upset some people.
 
2013-07-18 07:26:19 AM

OtherLittleGuy: I'd say shoot her computer too.

I'd approve of all that, plus teaching her what a sick twisted farktwat he and his brother (and their followers) arre by showing her the carnage (And I'm the type who hates the "show kids the morgue to tell them not to drink or drive or text


Yeah sure.  Teenage girls respond real well when their daddies shriek "NO you can't like him!  NO!  BAD!!"

Good plan.

Oktoberain: If I had a teenage daughter who was Twitter-swooning over this sick little farkwad, I'd delete her Twitter account myself--AFTER taking away her phone and computer, and grounding her for a solid month or six. What the hell kind of parents would allow such a thing?? Does *nobody* pay attention to what their kids are saying and doing online? It's called discipline, America. When your snowflakes do dumbass, embarrassing things, you're supposed to (1) NOTICE, and (2) do something about it. //Thankful right now that my 13 year old is a plain old, garden-variety skateboard-crazy boy


Right.  Because if there's ONE THING  you ought to expect from your teenage kid it's rationality and logic.

And skateboarder kids are usually anti-social and known to do lotsa drugs.  You should smash his board to be safe....
 
2013-07-18 07:35:50 AM

skylabdown: [www.tooconservative.com image 450x352]


That image disturbs me.
Why is he wearing glasses that are half-full of water? And what's going on in his mouth, is that a tooth graveyard?
I'd like to imagine that this guy is a DMV clerk from Little Rock and was photographed singing along at an outdoor concert, maybe a ZZ Top gig, and the photo captures the raw power of a beautiful moment for a temporarily free-flying regular guy whooping it up.
But it's more likely he's just an Australian losing his damn mind at the traffic on his commute home. Australians love themselves some water-filled glasses.
 
2013-07-18 07:37:32 AM

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.


One is discussing the issue and the other is creating the issue.  You really don't see the difference?
 
2013-07-18 07:39:13 AM

justoneznot: No outrage from me. Rolling Stone seems to like to create controversy from time to time to keep things "edgy". I always thought they were supposed to be a music magazine but every time they're in the news it never has anything to do with music.


They were never exclusively a music magazine, they have always covered both pop-culture and politics.
 
2013-07-18 07:50:29 AM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: 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".


actually what causes people to do such a thing, especially our own citizens, probably is something we should look at a bit more closely.

but go on, be outraged.
 
2013-07-18 09:31:00 AM

Aarontology: dletter: I don't believe the complaints are about the article (which is what subby's quote was about, I am not even sure RS's response references the cover, other than saying it was a cover storyu), it is mainly the "sexified" cover photo.  Which goes directly to what subby is implying ('yellow journalism').

It's a stupid f*cking complaint from people who need to be outraged and terrified all the goddamned time.


Yeah, people with emotions are stupid.
 
2013-07-18 09:55:32 AM
Fantastic Article

\Sand
\\Vaginas
\\\Slashies
 
2013-07-18 02:51:23 PM

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?


kind of a trick question... he had seven people killed but he never killed them himself. After his lawyer passed away his tapes were released, in those tapes it is revealed that Manson had many other people killed also, and that he (Manson) killed some people by himself.

What this means, and why he is listed as a mass murderer, is that at least 7 people were killed by his command which is more than were killed in Boston.
 
Displayed 32 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