FlashHarry: netizencain: How many other RS covers featured mass murders?was bush ever on the cover?
netizencain: How many other RS covers featured mass murders?
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.
cowgirl toffee: That cover is just as bad as this:Damn it Rolling Stones, we all expect better from you!
FlashHarry: JerseyTim: FlashHarry: netizencain: How many other RS covers featured mass murders?was bush ever on the cover?Look, I hate Sixteen Stone as much as the next guy, but I'd hardly call them mass murderers.they killed music for an entire generation!
BunkoSquad: The best part of today has been watching parts of Twitter get furious at the Rolling Stones.
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?
freetomato: I wonder how many magazine covers Bin Laden was on?
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
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.
PiffMan420: Bullshiat. They made a terrorist and a murder look like he was posing for the cover of Tiger Beat.
NorthVentricle: First thing I thought of:
Owangotang: It's too sympathetic for my liking. The blurb on the cover coupled with that photo makes it seem like RS is pushing the narrative that its' everyone else's fault, not his.fark that. He was not 9. He chose to become a monster.Rolling Stone used to be one of my favorite reads while on the commode, but now I would not even use it to wipe my ass.
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.
SilentStrider: Am I the only one who thinks he looks a little like Kit Harrington?
God-is-a-Taco: Also, I'm gonna buy five copies for my mother
HaywoodJablonski: I saw the cover. Please explain why I should be outraged
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Aug 17 2017 08:01:06
Runtime: 0.536 sec (535 ms)