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.

(Rolling Stone)   Now that everyone has collectively shiat themselves over a photo of an alleged terrorist, would you actually like to read the article that the photo is for? No? Really? Well fark you then, here it is anyway   (rollingstone.com) divider line 196
    More: Interesting, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, North Caucasus, crisis negotiation, Boylston Street, Pat Benatar, Central Asian, University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, russian forces  
•       •       •

9038 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Jul 2013 at 9:29 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



196 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-07-18 09:33:06 AM
The cover story we are publishing this week falls within the traditions of journalism and Rolling Stone's long-standing commitment to serious and thoughtful coverage of the most important political and cultural issues of our day. The fact that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is young, and in the same age group as many of our readers, makes it all the more important for us to examine the complexities of this issue and gain a more complete understanding of how a tragedy like this happens. -THE EDITORS

The article would be more credible without the leading excuses.
 
2013-07-18 09:33:08 AM
Fark you subby!  I LOVE being outraged.

It is the only way I feel alive in this empty life of mine.
 
2013-07-18 09:33:26 AM
It was actually a pretty decent article, it's a shame it will get overlooked because people shiat themselves collectively over dumb crap
 
2013-07-18 09:34:22 AM
Who has time to read? We judge things by their covers in this society
 
2013-07-18 09:34:23 AM
Perfect example of the poutrage culture.
 
2013-07-18 09:34:25 AM
I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.
 
2013-07-18 09:35:15 AM
I can't believe how stupid some people are about this stupid glammed up cover.  They need to just go fark themselves.  People with emotions are sooooo stupid.  Dead people and kids with missing limbs just need to get over it already.

Also, something about how it is just conservatards getting upset about it.... enlightened liberals are totally hip.
 
2013-07-18 09:35:16 AM
Boston.com was so infuriated by the cover that they've run 418 articles about it...each featuring a picture of the horrible cover
 
2013-07-18 09:36:05 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: It was actually a pretty decent article, it's a shame it will get overlooked because people shiat themselves collectively over dumb crap


sometimes the ignorant tightass club gets you, sometimes you get surrounded by ignorant tightasses

DigitalSorceress: I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.


....you understand that it was a photo he took months/years ago and the same photo every news agency has used since they found out it was him, right?
 
2013-07-18 09:36:31 AM

J.Shelby: The cover story we are publishing this week falls within the traditions of journalism and Rolling Stone's long-standing commitment to serious and thoughtful coverage of the most important political and cultural issues of our day. The fact that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is young, and in the same age group as many of our readers, makes it all the more important for us to examine the complexities of this issue and gain a more complete understanding of how a tragedy like this happens. -THE EDITORS


When was the last time they did a study of their readers? 1978?
 
2013-07-18 09:37:14 AM
In defense of the pants shiaters, it might have been nice if they'd at least used a photograph that didn't recall a Adam Levine photo shoot. Let's be honest here: This was designed to generate some rabblerabblerabble.
 
2013-07-18 09:39:27 AM

Incorrigible Astronaut: J.Shelby: The cover story we are publishing this week falls within the traditions of journalism and Rolling Stone's long-standing commitment to serious and thoughtful coverage of the most important political and cultural issues of our day. The fact that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is young, and in the same age group as many of our readers, makes it all the more important for us to examine the complexities of this issue and gain a more complete understanding of how a tragedy like this happens. -THE EDITORS

When was the last time they did a study of their readers? 1978?


Its not who actually reads it but who they tell their advertisers that reads it.
 
2013-07-18 09:41:17 AM
This is the same quality as most of the other non-music related articles in Rolling Stone.  Excellent.  It is an honest look at Johar from his time in high school as a good kid followed by the problems caused from his parents going back to Russia, his brother's turn to radical islam and his loss of friends and purpose in college.
 
2013-07-18 09:42:36 AM

DigitalSorceress: I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.


Hey, Stop being reasonable! We don't cotton to that 'round here!
 
2013-07-18 09:42:49 AM

Lexx: Perfect example of the poutrage culture.


Also a perfect example of how most people are absolutely incapable of allowing nuanced concepts to enter their brains, and how tragedy must be packaged such that it confirms existing stereotypes about the nature of evil.

This is a good book on a similar subject:

www.esquire.com
 
2013-07-18 09:42:56 AM

Incorrigible Astronaut: When was the last time they did a study of their readers? 1978?


Seriously.  The kid was 19, and if I recall correctly was 18 in that picture.  RS hasn't catered to the 18yo age group in eons.  For fark's sake, 18yo practically never touch physical, printed, magazines anymore.

If anything, the demographic of RS these days is waiting rooms at orthopedic doctor's offices....
 
2013-07-18 09:43:03 AM

Snort: Fark you subby!  I LOVE being outraged.

It is the only way I feel alive in this empty life of mine.


Well, there's that, and schadenfreude....and beer.
 
2013-07-18 09:43:10 AM

somedude210: sometimes the ignorant tightass club gets you, sometimes you get surrounded by ignorant tightasses


True, it's just...this ain't Time magazine so you cannot expect them to use a shot from say his court room appearance for instance.
 
2013-07-18 09:43:53 AM

satanorsanta: and his loss of friends and purpose in college.


As a graduate of UMD, I can tell you that that place will suck whatever joy you had about life right out of you. I still swear you can trace back the financial crash to one of our business students.

/was pleasantly amused they described the campus as the grey slab it is.
 
2013-07-18 09:44:08 AM
www.gannett-cdn.com
 
2013-07-18 09:44:28 AM
I like the use of the word alleged.  I get they whole innocent until proven guilty, but is there much doubt here?
 
2013-07-18 09:45:59 AM
Time Magazine Person of the Year (and on the cover)
1938 - Adolf Hitler
1939 - Joseph Stalin
1942 - Joseph Stalin
1979 - Ayatollah Khomeini
1995 - Newt Gingrich

You mean bad guys get cover shots too? This is an outrage.
 
2013-07-18 09:45:59 AM
Well thanks George W Bush
 
2013-07-18 09:46:00 AM

Snort: Fark you subby!  I LOVE being outraged.

It is the only way I feel alive in this empty life of mine.


/FAVORITED
 
2013-07-18 09:46:12 AM
Good god, enough already...

Boston was bad. Three people died. The story was sexy and featured a young Bob Dylan look-alike. But honestly, it really didn't rank that far up in the tragedy category, even for that week. A fertilizer factory in Texas blew up, wiped out a small town, killed dozens, and the cause is suspicious and not fully known--that story was pushed to the back page so Mr. Floppy hair jihadi-whiner could take the spotlight. Enough of this, giving Dhzerk-off the press and attention he and his brother what they really wanted.

/rant off
 
2013-07-18 09:46:39 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: True, it's just...this ain't Time magazine so you cannot expect them to use a shot from say his court room appearance for instance.


especially for a story about his life before the bombing. It's a "look at this kid. he doesn't look like what you thought terrorists look like" thing
 
2013-07-18 09:49:05 AM
These were all so much worse:
assets.rollingstone.com
www.foliomag.com
assets.rollingstone.com
www.dailystab.com

That's not even all of them.

Nauseating.
 
2013-07-18 09:49:38 AM
Adam Lanza was "the same age as their readers" too. How come he never got the rock star treatment?
 
2013-07-18 09:50:10 AM
So, actually, I haven't been following things that closely so I didn't realize this was the same photo every news outlet has been using...I tend to keep far away from most of the mainstream media. Still it doesn't change my statement one whit - this guy on the cover of Rolling Stone looks more like a rock star than a terrorist - I get that they want to tell the story, I get that this is a pic of him from before he did this, but it just seems kind of insensitive to put this pic of him on the cover of this magazine... it's a context thing.

DigitalSorceress: I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.

....you understand that it was a photo he took months/years ago and the same photo every news agency has used since they found out it was him, right?
 
2013-07-18 09:50:14 AM

somedude210: especially for a story about his life before the bombing. It's a "look at this kid. he doesn't look like what you thought terrorists look like" thing


What's so interesting about the article is when you compare it to his statements recently about how he was a loner, had no friends, never fit in, etc.. when the reality is at least on the surface this kid was given nearly every chance you can think of. Good schools, a large circle of people he hung out with, decent family life, etc...

And to see what he became is just an amazing transformation, that instead of reading about this and learning more about what radicalizes people, we huff and puff about a god damn photo.
 
2013-07-18 09:50:40 AM
this reminds me of when women fall in love with criminals and men in jail..
this piece was a terrorist sympathizer and romantizer's wet dream.
 
2013-07-18 09:51:56 AM
Trying to differentiate between the people outraged by the cover, and the people who are outraged by the people outraged by the cover.
 
2013-07-18 09:52:12 AM

p the boiler: Time Magazine Person of the Year (and on the cover)
1938 - Adolf Hitler
1939 - Joseph Stalin
1942 - Joseph Stalin
1979 - Ayatollah Khomeini
1995 - Newt Gingrich

You mean bad guys get cover shots too? This is an outrage.


You left out the absolute worst "person of the year": 2006.
 
2013-07-18 09:52:57 AM

BunkoSquad: Who has time to read? We judge things by their covers in this society


Was this the headline you submitted it with?
 
2013-07-18 09:53:33 AM
I don't need to read it. Everything I know about Islam I learned on 9/11.
 
2013-07-18 09:53:57 AM
Number of people who would have seen the RS cover without the media poutrage coverage:

15

Number who see it every 15 minutes in the 24-hour news coverage:

15,000,000
 
2013-07-18 09:53:59 AM
Everyone SHHHHHHHHHHHH!

I'm reading.
 
2013-07-18 09:54:23 AM

HailRobonia: p the boiler: Time Magazine Person of the Year (and on the cover)
1938 - Adolf Hitler
1939 - Joseph Stalin
1942 - Joseph Stalin
1979 - Ayatollah Khomeini
1995 - Newt Gingrich

You mean bad guys get cover shots too? This is an outrage.

You left out the absolute worst "person of the year": 2006.


2006 was before Justin Bieber hit, right?
 
2013-07-18 09:56:54 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: What's so interesting about the article is when you compare it to his statements recently about how he was a loner, had no friends, never fit in, etc.. when the reality is at least on the surface this kid was given nearly every chance you can think of. Good schools, a large circle of people he hung out with, decent family life, etc..


Are you sure that wasn't about his brother? His brother seemed to have the problems fitting in and that, I think, ultimately lead him to go into radicalized Islam. Johar, who looked up to his brother, then followed the same path for different reasons (not fitting in with college, etc)

I think ultimately, you find that the reason most people do these sorts of things like the marathon bombing and Columbine and whatnot is that they don't feel like they fit in, like that there is something inherently wrong with them that they can't figure out but everyone knows. It sends them into an increasing spiral of depression which they turn to anger and then when it builds up enough, they take that anger out on someone.

The home life in the Tsarnaev family sounds like it was pretty rough to begin with. I'd be impressed if anyone could grow up in a family like that and not go off the deep end in some way
 
2013-07-18 09:59:17 AM
Congratulations, you all fell for the generate outrage to put your magazine name in the headlines ploy.
 
2013-07-18 09:59:28 AM
I don't care what the article is about.   It could be in the magazine with any other picture on the front.

What I care about is this:  Putting him on the cover is basically an invitation saying to any would-be domestic terrorists saying "Look!  If you do as this asshole then you, too, will be famous and have your picture on the cover of Rolling Stone!".

Terrorism feeds on media exposure.  It's SOLE PURPOSE is to get it's message across by creating media exposiure.

This is really an example of "Don't Feed The Trolls."
 
2013-07-18 10:00:00 AM
People who think he looks like a rock star are smoking bad stuff.  Looks like a kid in a t-shirt.  WTF?!?

Great article.
 
2013-07-18 10:00:12 AM

Jesus built my hybrid: Congratulations, you all fell for the generate outrage to put your magazine name in the headlines ploy.


This. I was actually surprised to hear that Rolling Stone was still a thing.
 
2013-07-18 10:00:12 AM
"The day after Columbine, I was interviewed for the Tom Brokaw news program. The reporter had been assigned a theory and was seeking sound bites to support it. "Wouldn't you say," she asked, "that killings like this are influenced by violent movies?" No, I said, I wouldn't say that. "But what about Basketball Diaries?" she asked. "Doesn't that have a scene of a boy walking into a school with a machine gun?" The obscure 1995 Leonardo Di Caprio movie did indeed have a brief fantasy scene of that nature, I said, but the movie failed at the box office (it grossed only $2.5 million), and it's unlikely the Columbine killers saw it. The reporter looked disappointed, so I offered her my theory. "Events like this," I said, "if they are influenced by anything, are influenced by news programs like your own. When an unbalanced kid walks into a school and starts shooting, it becomes a major media event. Cable news drops ordinary programming and goes around the clock with it. The story is assigned a logo and a theme song; these two kids were packaged as the Trench Coat Mafia. The message is clear to other disturbed kids around the country: If I shoot up my school, I can be famous. The TV will talk about nothing else but me. Experts will try to figure out what I was thinking. The kids and teachers at school will see they shouldn't have messed with me. I'll go out in a blaze of glory.

In short, I said, events like Columbine are influenced far less by violent movies than by CNN, the NBC Nightly News and all the other news media, who glorify the killers in the guise of "explaining" them. I commended the policy at the Sun-Times, where our editor said the paper would no longer feature school killings on Page 1. The reporter thanked me and turned off the camera. Of course the interview was never used. They found plenty of talking heads to condemn violent movies, and everybody was happy."

- Roger Ebert
 
2013-07-18 10:01:11 AM
Fine.  I read it.  Can we hang him now?
 
2013-07-18 10:01:20 AM

somedude210: The home life in the Tsarnaev family sounds like it was pretty rough to begin with. I'd be impressed if anyone could grow up in a family like that and not go off the deep end in some way


For the older brother yep, but for the younger it was the complete opposite. On Fresh Air a few weeks ago they even had on a guy who's kid was friends with the younger brother and from all accounts on the surface things were hunky dory.
 
2013-07-18 10:01:35 AM

Wendy's Chili: Adam Lanza was "the same age as their readers" too. How come he never got the rock star treatment?


No fan girls.
 
2013-07-18 10:02:05 AM
This whole controversy is ridiculous. If they were fellating him in the article and praising his motivations, that would be one thing, but merely talking about what may have led to this kind of act, and the man's background is totally different. And the victims have gotten plenty of press(That's the next argument people whip out).

Jesus, the world isn't unicorns farting rainbows, bad people are out there, and we're just as interested in their motivations as we are in what happens to the nice people. Of course, some people are just shiatting their pants because the guy is on Rolling Stone for some reason.
 
2013-07-18 10:02:20 AM

abfalter: Terrorism feeds on media exposure. It's SOLE PURPOSE is to get it's message across by creating media exposiure.


I'm pretty sure the point of terrorism is to terrorize, and the fact that by having everyone collectively shiat themselves because of a damn photo has done the damage.

or, you know, we could have a rational conversation about this and thereby nullify the terrorists without having to drone strike their ass
 
2013-07-18 10:02:55 AM

DigitalSorceress: So, actually, I haven't been following things that closely so I didn't realize this was the same photo every news outlet has been using... - this guy on the cover of Rolling Stone looks more like a rock star than a terrorist.


Wait are you telling me that terrorists might not look like this...
altrapoint.com

But look like this...
blogs.tribune.com.pk
  or this...

3.bp.blogspot.com

Maybe, just maybe, that's kind of the point.
 
2013-07-18 10:03:21 AM
I'M MAD AS HELL ABOUT THIS! BUY THE WAY, CHECK OUT MY NEW BAND! OUR ALBUM DROPS SOON! UH-WAH-AH-AH-AH!
 
2013-07-18 10:03:32 AM
I'm glad Rolling Stone did this.  I think the prisons should give the magazine to every inmate in America.  It should whip them up with anticipation of rape while the kid is being tried and convicted.
 
2013-07-18 10:03:33 AM

Wendy's Chili: Adam Lanza was "the same age as their readers" too. How come he never got the rock star treatment?


Hardly Rock-Star treatment... Both are important cases of what mis-raising a child can create.
 
2013-07-18 10:04:23 AM

Mikey1969: This whole controversy is ridiculous. If they were fellating him in the article and praising his motivations, that would be one thing, but merely talking about what may have led to this kind of act, and the man's background is totally different. And the victims have gotten plenty of press(That's the next argument people whip out).

Jesus, the world isn't unicorns farting rainbows, bad people are out there, and we're just as interested in their motivations as we are in what happens to the nice people. Of course, some people are just shiatting their pants because the guy is on Rolling Stone for some reason.


Glorifying the victims of terrorism as heroes is only going to make kids want to be blown up by bombs!
 
2013-07-18 10:04:28 AM
I don't really have the capacity to be outraged over something like a Rolling Stone cover, but I certainly do disagree with their choice and agree with the argument that its a mistake to continue publicizing and showing pictures of those that do wrong, especially when its a glamour shot, since it only serves to reinforce the idea that doing wrong will get you publicity and attention.

Some (twisted) people really do see the world as depicted in "Natural Born Killers" and encouraging them is not exactly helping prevent future tragedy.  Regardless of the content of the article, there are some people looking at the news stand, wondering what it would take to get their own photo there.

I support the first amendment and their right to publish as they see fit, but I would prefer it if more media outlets would use thought, discretion, and responsibility.

But what do I know, I'm probably just a something-wing butthurt so-and-so.
 
2013-07-18 10:06:04 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: For the older brother yep, but for the younger it was the complete opposite. On Fresh Air a few weeks ago they even had on a guy who's kid was friends with the younger brother and from all accounts on the surface things were hunky dory.


true, but it sounds like, from the article, that things went to shiat fairly quickly in the last few years (divorce, father moving back to dagestan, mother following, both staying, sisters married off, etc) and so he only had his, now radicalized, brother as his only family support he could turn to.
 
2013-07-18 10:06:16 AM

Petit_Merdeux: Number of people who would have seen the RS cover without the media poutrage coverage:

15

Number who see it every 15 minutes in the 24-hour news coverage:

15,000,000


Number of people who already saw it anyway because it ran on every news station, web site, and newspaper for weeks:

300,000,000
 
2013-07-18 10:07:34 AM

Incorrigible Astronaut: J.Shelby: The cover story we are publishing this week falls within the traditions of journalism and Rolling Stone's long-standing commitment to serious and thoughtful coverage of the most important political and cultural issues of our day. The fact that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is young, and in the same age group as many of our readers, makes it all the more important for us to examine the complexities of this issue and gain a more complete understanding of how a tragedy like this happens. -THE EDITORS

When was the last time they did a study of their readers? 1978?


To be fair, "many" is one of those weasel words.
 
2013-07-18 10:07:43 AM

DigitalSorceress: Still it doesn't change my statement one whit - this guy on the cover of Rolling Stone looks more like a rock star than a terrorist


Would you prefer it if they put a turban on his head to conform to your notions of what a terrorist should look like?
 
2013-07-18 10:08:05 AM
HailRobonia, you have one of the best logins on the planet.

As for this cover shot, I haven't heard this much outrage in the Boston area since Bill Buckner blew the World Series for the Sox.  I just wish everyone was talking about the root causes of this kid's actions instead of the stupid cover.  We don't want more of these little monsters running around.
 
GBB
2013-07-18 10:08:14 AM
Print is dead.
static.giantbomb.com
 
2013-07-18 10:08:59 AM
Well in all fairness, he did rock boston
 
2013-07-18 10:09:00 AM

DigitalSorceress: I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.


Why? Does he need horns and a pitchfork? Jesus, part of understanding things like this is coming to grips with the fact that these people look like the kid next door. I can 100% understand why they chose that picture. It's supposed to create the "What went wrong?" though in your head, since something obviously did. He didn't pop out of the womb wanting to blow up people at a marathon.
 
2013-07-18 10:10:20 AM

somedude210: true, but it sounds like, from the article, that things went to shiat fairly quickly in the last few years (divorce, father moving back to dagestan, mother following, both staying, sisters married off, etc) and so he only had his, now radicalized, brother as his only family support he could turn to.


True, just I guess I am still amazed at how far things can go from happy immigrant life to world of shiat
 
2013-07-18 10:11:04 AM

jfivealive: Well in all fairness, he did rock boston


Even pulled off two blasting loud shows in one day, that's effort on an artists part
 
2013-07-18 10:13:36 AM

trappedspirit: BunkoSquad: Who has time to read? We judge things by their covers in this society

Was this the headline you submitted it with?


That would have been a truly awesome headline...
 
2013-07-18 10:15:20 AM
Let's not forget this poor child was also, according to Bloomberg's Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a victim of gun violence.
 
2013-07-18 10:17:54 AM

DigitalSorceress: I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.


Yeah, they're called idiots.
 
2013-07-18 10:18:10 AM
We sing about beauty
and we sing about truth
At ten thousand dollars a show.
 
2013-07-18 10:18:53 AM
false flag!
 
2013-07-18 10:20:06 AM

2wolves: We sing about beauty
and we sing about truth
At ten thousand dollars a show.


Damnit. Now I'll be singing that song all day.
 
2013-07-18 10:20:32 AM

The Crepes of Wrath: DigitalSorceress: Still it doesn't change my statement one whit - this guy on the cover of Rolling Stone looks more like a rock star than a terrorist

Would you prefer it if they put a turban on his head to conform to your notions of what a terrorist should look like?


I'm with DigitalSorceress. Why not post rock-star pictures of the victims instead and write the article about the bomber too?  Is the money really worth it compared to irreperably hurting those victims who are still alive that are looking for a little hope in our society? The problem with the American media today is that it forgoes common sense for shock value and profit 99% of the time... Promoting themes of racial division during the Trayvon case is another recent example.  They just seek to divide us all to make more $, and we swallow it whole.  They, likewise, take zero responsibility for it; it's always someone else's fault but their own.

/Fark em.
 
2013-07-18 10:22:27 AM
I understand why some people (especially those directly affected by the violence of the Boston Marathon bombing) would be disgusted by *any* image of the bomber, but I rather like the photo on the cover because it forces us to perceive the bomber as a human being, and that can help facilitate a discussion on what caused a human being to do such a disgusting act of inhumanity.

It's like the discussion of where to bury his brother.  Many people protested that we should just flush it down the shiatter or some other inhumane act of burial, but I think that is disingenuous to the fact that we have more in common with these terrorists than most of us would like to believe.
 
2013-07-18 10:23:20 AM
Here's the headline that might reach some impressionable young males--

See this kid?  He'll never go on a date, eat a non-gross meal, or have a pair of nice warm boobs in his hands EVER AGAIN.
 
2013-07-18 10:23:53 AM
Spin did an article about this when Dhokar was a fetus.
 
2013-07-18 10:23:55 AM

Lor M. Ipsum: DigitalSorceress: I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.

Yeah, they're called idiots.


I think that there are people who are genuinely upset at the cover.  People who were maybe downtown at the time of the bombings, people who live in the greater Boston area, or similar. The image on the cover may be stressful for those people.

But I am absolutely convinced that this is a classic bandwagon issue. For all of those people who may really be upset, there are going to be dozens of people who have to jump on the outrage bandwagon.
 
2013-07-18 10:26:08 AM

Lor M. Ipsum: and that can help facilitate a discussion on what caused a human being to do such a disgusting act of inhumanity.


Now you know full well that reasonableness has no business being around here
 
2013-07-18 10:26:30 AM

somedude210: abfalter: Terrorism feeds on media exposure. It's SOLE PURPOSE is to get it's message across by creating media exposiure.

I'm pretty sure the point of terrorism is to terrorize, and the fact that by having everyone collectively shiat themselves because of a damn photo has done the damage.

or, you know, we could have a rational conversation about this and thereby nullify the terrorists without having to drone strike their ass


The "point" of terrorism is twofold: to gain attention/exposure to, and to suppress/subjugate any possible resistance to their cause.  If they believed that they would be able to get more attention and/or converts by nonviolent means, they would use them.  And attention through their acts was exactly what they got.
 
2013-07-18 10:27:17 AM

Some Bass Playing Guy: Lor M. Ipsum: DigitalSorceress: I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.

Yeah, they're called idiots.

I think that there are people who are genuinely upset at the cover.  People who were maybe downtown at the time of the bombings, people who live in the greater Boston area, or similar. The image on the cover may be stressful for those people.

But I am absolutely convinced that this is a classic bandwagon issue. For all of those people who may really be upset, there are going to be dozens of people who have to jump on the outrage bandwagon.


I agree; I over-reacted.  I tried to clarify a little further down
 
2013-07-18 10:27:38 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: True, just I guess I am still amazed at how far things can go from happy immigrant life to world of shiat


lesson learned: never become an immigrant
 
2013-07-18 10:28:00 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: Lor M. Ipsum: and that can help facilitate a discussion on what caused a human being to do such a disgusting act of inhumanity.

Now you know full well that reasonableness has no business being around here


Yeah, but it's too early to start drinking
 
2013-07-18 10:33:06 AM

BAMFinator: I like the use of the word alleged.  I get they whole innocent until proven guilty, but is there much doubt here?


I was going to say this but also:

He's "alleged" until proven guilty which I get a little bit, but when all evidence points to innocent and they are proven so in a court of law like the Zimmerman case, you don't hear them properly calling him innocent.

The other day on the radio they said something about "Zimmerman alleges Trayvon was beating him to death by bashing his head against the ground..." and I'm yelling at the radio "ALLEGES?!?! It was proven with SCIENCE, entered as EVIDENCE in a COURT OF LAW and confirmed by a JURY. There is NO ALLEGING ABOUT IT."
 
2013-07-18 10:34:40 AM

Lor M. Ipsum: I understand why some people (especially those directly affected by the violence of the Boston Marathon bombing) would be disgusted by *any* image of the bomber, but I rather like the photo on the cover because it forces us to perceive the bomber as a human being, and that can help facilitate a discussion on what caused a human being to do such a disgusting act of inhumanity.

It's like the discussion of where to bury his brother.  Many people protested that we should just flush it down the shiatter or some other inhumane act of burial, but I think that is disingenuous to the fact that we have more in common with these terrorists than most of us would like to believe.


Good enough point. But couldn't they have done that on the inside of the magazine instead of glorifying him on the front cover? If they were really good at what they are supposed to be doing (writing), they could have made that point without doing that.  We glorify the villians in our society, never the victims.  Most of us still can't name one victim from 9-11, but we know the names of the terrorists.  The media focuses on the negative and forgets the whole lives of those who were cut short by idiocy and hatred. It's just sad.
 
2013-07-18 10:34:43 AM

somedude210: IdBeCrazyIf: True, it's just...this ain't Time magazine so you cannot expect them to use a shot from say his court room appearance for instance.

especially for a story about his life before the bombing. It's a "look at this kid. he doesn't look like what you thought terrorists look like" thing


Looks Arab-ish to me.
 
2013-07-18 10:35:50 AM

DigitalSorceress: I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.


Rock star? The photo had been widely circulated for months. It's not like RS called him in for a photo shoot.
 
2013-07-18 10:36:02 AM
This is Fark. No one reads the article around these parts.
 
2013-07-18 10:37:04 AM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: I don't need to read it. Everything I know about Islam I learned on 9/11.


It took you that long?

Can't say you're alone though. Bill Clinton allowed it to happen after all.
 
2013-07-18 10:37:47 AM

J.Shelby: The cover story we are publishing this week falls within the traditions of journalism and Rolling Stone's long-standing commitment to serious and thoughtful coverage of the most important political and cultural issues of our day. The fact that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is young, and in the same age group as many of our readers, makes it all the more important for us to examine the complexities of this issue and gain a more complete understanding of how a tragedy like this happens. -THE EDITORS

The article would be more credible without the leading excuses.


The only thing I find offensive is the idea that they're readers are college aged. Really? Really? C'mon now.
 
2013-07-18 10:38:31 AM
Usually, when there is some sort of popular outrage du jour, I can sorta-kinda see where it's coming from. I almost never agree with it, but I can understand it on some level.

This outrage is 100% invisible to me. I do not understand it at all. I do not see a "glam-rock-star" cover shot... I see something closer to a selfie. I see the sort of cover you'd expect for the story.

I am bewildered by people who seemingly never realized that every cover photo on every magazine cover they've seen in the past 20 years has been digitally altered in some way.

I am perplexed that people think this guy looked anything at all like Jim Morrison. A young Syd Barrett maybe, but even that's a stretch.

I am stunned by the people who are lining up to condemn an article they have never read.

And I have absolutely no idea why anyone could possibly care at this point who is on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine. Seriously, is it 1975 already?
 
2013-07-18 10:39:01 AM
People were protesting the photo, not the article.

Rolling Stone can put whatever they want on their cover. I wonder how they were able to make the kid look like Jim Morrison. Was that a photoshoot or a pre-bomb photo?
 
2013-07-18 10:39:38 AM
FTA: Jahar, or "Jizz," as his friends also called him

So that's what set him off...
 
2013-07-18 10:39:41 AM

Lor M. Ipsum: we have more in common with these terrorists than most of us would like to believe.


I can understand the reasoning for doing these stories, but it seems squandered on some subjects.
Terrorists, dictators, mass murderers, politicians, there isn't anything difficult to understand about these people and they don't share much with commoners.  They start out with a heart of malice and plan for self serving glory then finish out with inflicting an atrocity on humanity.
 There are lots of gray figures in current events that deserve the benefit of a doubt.

A mad bomber with a brother complex who drops explosives at the feet of an eight year old isn't one of them.
 
2013-07-18 10:40:41 AM

ManRay: People were protesting the photo, not the article.

Rolling Stone can put whatever they want on their cover. I wonder how they were able to make the kid look like Jim Morrison. Was that a photoshoot or a pre-bomb photo?


From what I read it was a self shot. It's appeared in other places as well.
 
2013-07-18 10:41:12 AM

Wendy's Chili: Adam Lanza was "the same age as their readers" too. How come he never got the rock star treatment?


Since when does the rockstar treatment include an article about how the said rockstar turned from average to monster?
 
2013-07-18 10:42:41 AM
I don't give a fark what's on the cover of Rolling Stone. Do I still have to read it?

// Although it sure seems to have been highly effective.
 
2013-07-18 10:43:53 AM

Mikey1969: DigitalSorceress: I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.

Why? Does he need horns and a pitchfork? Jesus, part of understanding things like this is coming to grips with the fact that these people look like the kid next door. I can 100% understand why they chose that picture. It's supposed to create the "What went wrong?" though in your head, since something obviously did. He didn't pop out of the womb wanting to blow up people at a marathon.



At least sinister him up a little bit.

jonmwessel.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-07-18 10:44:57 AM

abfalter: I don't care what the article is about.   It could be in the magazine with any other picture on the front.

What I care about is this:  Putting him on the cover is basically an invitation saying to any would-be domestic terrorists saying "Look!  If you do as this asshole then you, too, will be famous and have your picture on the cover of Rolling Stone!".

Terrorism feeds on media exposure.  It's SOLE PURPOSE is to get it's message across by creating media exposiure.

This is really an example of "Don't Feed The Trolls."


Uhm if that's all it takes to create terrorism then we've got a much bigger problem on our hands than a Rolling Stone cover.
 
2013-07-18 10:45:18 AM

Bullseyed: Looks Arab-ish to me.


well Caucasians will do that
 
2013-07-18 10:49:53 AM

DigitalSorceress: I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.


Because rock stars are all fine upstanding citizens which we should model ourselves after?

What does that even mean, "looking like a rock star?" That's your stuff. No tats and no guitar, no rock star.
 
2013-07-18 10:54:38 AM

way south: There are lots of gray figures in current events that deserve the benefit of a doubt.
A mad bomber with a brother complex who drops explosives at the feet of an eight year old isn't one of them.


Is that the source of the outrage here? Are people actually believing that RS's angle is "this terrorist deserves the benefit of the doubt"? That they're trying to elicit sympathy for him?

I'm being serious... is that what you actually believe is being done here?
 
2013-07-18 10:55:53 AM

ExpressPork: These were all so much worse:
[assets.rollingstone.com image 306x416]
[www.foliomag.com image 450x549]
[assets.rollingstone.com image 306x416]
[www.dailystab.com image 286x385]

That's not even all of them.

Nauseating.


Seriously, I got a free subscription to rolling stone that I didn't ask for. After reading the first couple issues that I received it now goes straight from my mailbox to my recycling bin.
 
2013-07-18 10:56:17 AM

ManRay: People were protesting the photo, not the article.

Rolling Stone can put whatever they want on their cover. I wonder how they were able to make the kid look like Jim Morrison.


The kid looks like himself in that photo. The only similarity with Jim Morrisson is the dark curly hair.
 
2013-07-18 10:56:46 AM

Brew78: I don't really have the capacity to be outraged over something like a Rolling Stone cover, but I certainly do disagree with their choice and agree with the argument that its a mistake to continue publicizing and showing pictures of those that do wrong.....


But the article is about Dzhokhar Tsarnaev being a real person instead of just some terrorist caricature. That's what responsible journalism should be about as opposed to the red blinking headlines and pictures of blood and explosions and police in body armor that CNN and FOX NEWS were showing.
 
2013-07-18 10:56:59 AM

sigdiamond2000: Also a perfect example of how most people are absolutely incapable of allowing nuanced concepts to enter their brains, and how tragedy must be packaged such that it confirms existing stereotypes about the nature of evil.


Dude started buying jihadist BS that justifies tageting adn killing civilians.

This story pretty much does.
 
2013-07-18 10:57:35 AM
Haven't read it yet, but you bet I will.

There's something important about having perspective. People do bad things... well WHY? Where did the rest of us fail in stopping them? What did we learn?

Also, I'm glad people are offended. It forces them to think once in a while.
 
2013-07-18 10:57:35 AM

BunkoSquad: Boston.com was so infuriated by the cover that they've run 418 articles about it...each featuring a picture of the horrible cover


As funny and ironic as it looks, I can understand the logic behind it.  If they didn't show the cover, Rolling Stone would get scads more hits by viewers who would want to see the cover for themselves.  Providing the cover image partly prevents RS from profiting from people's curiosity.
 
2013-07-18 11:00:43 AM

Bontesla: Wendy's Chili: Adam Lanza was "the same age as their readers" too. How come he never got the rock star treatment?

Since when does the rockstar treatment include an article about how the said rockstar turned from average to monster?


Eh, it's still attention.

More to the point, Lanza had been perceived for a long time (correctly, as it happens) as having a screw loose. His crime is still a tragedy full of unanswered questions, but the perpetrator hews much more closely to the popular image of the "nutcase run amok". You expect that. You don't expect your chill stoner buddy to start blowing off limbs for the glory of Allah.

IdBeCrazyIf: What's so interesting about the article is when you compare it to his statements recently about how he was a loner, had no friends, never fit in, etc.. when the reality is at least on the surface this kid was given nearly every chance you can think of. Good schools, a large circle of people he hung out with, decent family life, etc...

And to see what he became is just an amazing transformation, that instead of reading about this and learning more about what radicalizes people, we huff and puff about a god damn photo.


Yeah. I felt kind of bad for his friends. They didn't help the way that maybe they could have, didn't know Jahar the way they thought, don't know how to feel about themselves and their buddies now. And on top of that they're getting harried by the Feds.

I'd also like to give a shout-out to all the people who've made witty remarks about magazines, print media, and/or Rolling Stone being dead. That kind of humor is fresh, original, and just what this thread needed.
 
2013-07-18 11:03:24 AM

Inchoate: And on top of that they're getting harried by the Feds.


I was actually a bit shocked by their statements that they were treated like they were by the feds. I'm interested if the parties involved get investigated by the ACLU
 
2013-07-18 11:03:31 AM
Very good article.

People need to take notice of this article because what led him into radicalism, losing his support system, which didn't seem like the most stable of support systems to begin with, feeling isolated and turning to a person for support that wasn't very stable himself (his brother) for support, are things that really do affect young people everyday. Whether it be for radical movements, gangs, prostitution, assholes look for these types of people that are going through these things to exploit. All of this outrage about Rolling Stone is giving him the rockstar treatment is just people burying their heads in the sand and ignoring this fact.
 
2013-07-18 11:03:56 AM
I was amused at all the people that don't read Rolling Stone anyway shouting loudly about how bad the magazine is for the cover photo.

Then again, I can't help but feel that magazines are dead anyway.

On the third hand, dude looks pretty much just like a young rock star, perhaps that's the (apparently subtle) point?
 
2013-07-18 11:05:32 AM

GurneyHalleck: HailRobonia, you have one of the best logins on the planet.

As for this cover shot, I haven't heard this much outrage in the Boston area since Bill Buckner blew the World Series for the Sox.  I just wish everyone was talking about the root causes of this kid's actions instead of the stupid cover.  We don't want more of these little monsters running around.


Islam? that root cause?

seems he was a normal pot smoking white kid in a decent school system, with inner beliefs about Muslims & perceived injustice against Islam that festered under the surface. pretty moderate Islam if you're smoking pot and going out with non Muslims.

so all of us need to scrutinize our moderate Muslim friends?
 
2013-07-18 11:06:18 AM
This the third time this thread has appeared. You are NOT getting better at it.

Same comments, same photos, same comparisons.

But I guess it's generating hits, and that's all Drew cares about.
 
2013-07-18 11:06:48 AM

Bullseyed: and I'm yelling at the radio "ALLEGES?!?! It was proven with SCIENCE, entered as EVIDENCE in a COURT OF LAW and confirmed by a JURY. There is NO ALLEGING ABOUT IT."


At some point, does it occur to you that maybe...just maybe... you have a problem with outrage addiction?
 
2013-07-18 11:09:15 AM

quartercomma: Here's the headline that might reach some impressionable young males--

See this kid?  He'll never go on a date, eat a non-gross meal, or have a pair of nice warm boobs in his hands EVER AGAIN.


The article mentioned Jahar being friendly with girls, but never particularly intimate. I wonder if he might be gay, or if he has some other significant mental upfarkery regarding sex. That would definitely be an angst 'n' alienation generator.
 
2013-07-18 11:09:59 AM
People are treating this kids name he's farking Voldemort.  It's weird how so many people have allowed a picture and a name to have that kind of power over them.  It's like some sort of Cult of BIzzarro Personality.
 
2013-07-18 11:12:28 AM

Disgruntled Goat: This the third time this thread has appeared. You are NOT getting better at it.

Same comments, same photos, same comparisons.

But I guess it's generating hits, and that's all Drew cares about.


first article was the initial outrage over it. Second was the follow-up to it where all the businesses were pulling it and third (this one) is about the actual article that the outrageous photo is for, possibly in the hopes of generating a rational discussion about the article and the life that lead to all this.
 
2013-07-18 11:13:46 AM
Next week they should have the mooninites on the cover
 
2013-07-18 11:14:11 AM

BunkoSquad: Who has time to read? We judge things by their covers in this society


Your statement is probably a lot more profound than you thought it was when you wrote it or will ever think it is.
 
2013-07-18 11:15:50 AM

Lor M. Ipsum: Yeah, but it's too early to start drinking


It's 5pm somewhere in the world
 
2013-07-18 11:17:19 AM

ExpressPork: These were all so much worse:
[assets.rollingstone.com image 306x416]
[www.foliomag.com image 450x549]
[assets.rollingstone.com image 306x416]
[www.dailystab.com image 286x385]

That's not even all of them.

Nauseating.


So what your saying is:

na.leagueoflegends.com
 
2013-07-18 11:18:58 AM

somedude210: Disgruntled Goat: This the third time this thread has appeared. You are NOT getting better at it.

Same comments, same photos, same comparisons.

But I guess it's generating hits, and that's all Drew cares about.

first article was the initial outrage over it. Second was the follow-up to it where all the businesses were pulling it and third (this one) is about the actual article that the outrageous photo is for, possibly in the hopes of generating a rational discussion about the article and the life that lead to all this.


And yet, as I said (typed), all three comment threads are exactly the same.

"...generating a rational discussion about the article..."  Hahaha. This is FARK.
 
2013-07-18 11:19:42 AM
Not a very interesting article. Typical blame everyone but the individual liberal philosophy. The question is, if nobody is responsible for their own actions, how do you blame it on other people who apparently are not responsible for their actions.
 
2013-07-18 11:20:10 AM

whither_apophis: Next week they should have the mooninites on the cover


Maybe they should....it's WELL past time that we, as a country, had an honest discussion about the role of police in society and whether we should allow the kind of overreaction like the ones that we seem to be getting from the Boston PD.
 
2013-07-18 11:22:08 AM

MyRandomName: Not a very interesting article.


Which you clearly didn't read.
 
2013-07-18 11:22:38 AM
FTFA: A diligent student, Jahar talked about attending Brandeis

wow...
 
2013-07-18 11:22:54 AM

IamAwake: Incorrigible Astronaut: When was the last time they did a study of their readers? 1978?

Seriously.  The kid was 19, and if I recall correctly was 18 in that picture.  RS hasn't catered to the 18yo age group in eons.  For fark's sake, 18yo practically never touch physical, printed, magazines anymore.

If anything, the demographic of RS these days is waiting rooms at orthopedic doctor's offices....


I suppose you haven't read RS in a while.

Yes, it caters to millennials.  And old farts as well.

We got a complimentary sub to RS for ordering concert tickets online.

It is surprisingly well written, for the most part.
 
2013-07-18 11:23:08 AM

MyRandomName: Not a very interesting article. Typical blame everyone but the individual liberal philosophy. The question is, if nobody is responsible for their own actions, how do you blame it on other people who apparently are not responsible for their actions.


He isn't even of legal age to purchase alcohol. How much personal responsibility should society expect him to have?
 
2013-07-18 11:23:11 AM

sigdiamond2000: Lexx: Perfect example of the poutrage culture.

Also a perfect example of how most people are absolutely incapable of allowing nuanced concepts to enter their brains, and how tragedy must be packaged such that it confirms existing stereotypes about the nature of evil.

This is a good book on a similar subject:

[www.esquire.com image 240x365]



I have been wanting to read that but have not had time.  Is it good?

If you want to have one concise collection of bad stuff to get outraged about this is a good book too.  It covers a lot of the early events which have laid the foundation for what we are dealing with today.  A great read.  It will also make you think twice every time you see a duffel bag.
 
2013-07-18 11:24:16 AM

micah1701: ExpressPork: These were all so much worse:
[assets.rollingstone.com image 306x416]
[www.foliomag.com image 450x549]
[assets.rollingstone.com image 306x416]
[www.dailystab.com image 286x385]

That's not even all of them.

Nauseating.

Seriously, I got a free subscription to rolling stone that I didn't ask for. After reading the first couple issues that I received it now goes straight from my mailbox to my recycling bin.


Like me, you probably got it from ordering concert tickets online.

I stopped it once they asked me to start paying for it.

Not sure what it was that you saw so bad with it, I was actually a little surprised that many of their articles were decent.
 
2013-07-18 11:25:41 AM

ph0rk: I was amused at all the people that don't read Rolling Stone anyway shouting loudly about how bad the magazine is for the cover photo.

Then again, I can't help but feel that magazines are dead anyway.

On the third hand, dude looks pretty much just like a young rock star, perhaps that's the (apparently subtle) point?


Magazines are not dead.  There's actually been an uptick lately.
 
2013-07-18 11:25:48 AM

Inchoate: Bontesla: Wendy's Chili: Adam Lanza was "the same age as their readers" too. How come he never got the rock star treatment?

Since when does the rockstar treatment include an article about how the said rockstar turned from average to monster?

Eh, it's still attention.

More to the point, Lanza had been perceived for a long time (correctly, as it happens) as having a screw loose. His crime is still a tragedy full of unanswered questions, but the perpetrator hews much more closely to the popular image of the "nutcase run amok". You expect that. You don't expect your chill stoner buddy to start blowing off limbs for the glory of Allah.

IdBeCrazyIf: What's so interesting about the article is when you compare it to his statements recently about how he was a loner, had no friends, never fit in, etc.. when the reality is at least on the surface this kid was given nearly every chance you can think of. Good schools, a large circle of people he hung out with, decent family life, etc...

And to see what he became is just an amazing transformation, that instead of reading about this and learning more about what radicalizes people, we huff and puff about a god damn photo.

Yeah. I felt kind of bad for his friends. They didn't help the way that maybe they could have, didn't know Jahar the way they thought, don't know how to feel about themselves and their buddies now. And on top of that they're getting harried by the Feds.

I'd also like to give a shout-out to all the people who've made witty remarks about magazines, print media, and/or Rolling Stone being dead. That kind of humor is fresh, original, and just what this thread needed.


It's exactly that confusion and surprise that makes this important. How does a completely generic kid become a terrorist?

The picture stresses how ordinary this kid is. How moderately, youthful and American he comes across. That he could carry out such horrific acts on the strangers he lived among is noteworthy.

Why shouldn't they show us the banality of evil? Showing a mug shot doesn't illustrate that point as effectively.
 
2013-07-18 11:26:42 AM

DigitalSorceress: I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.


THIS.

It was a bad move having him on the cover, but not a bad move to write an article about it.
 
2013-07-18 11:27:33 AM
When I was a kid I remember someone telling me that I shouldn't play Wolfenstein 3D because it depicted Nazis, regardless of the context. 50 years after World War II they were angry that a Nazi was simply on the screen.
 
2013-07-18 11:27:35 AM

tripleseven: Magazines are not dead.  There's actually been an uptick lately.


Uptick as in they are becoming profitable again, or uptick like cassette tapes and vinyl?
 
2013-07-18 11:33:39 AM

louiedog: When I was a kid I remember someone telling me that I shouldn't play Wolfenstein 3D because it depicted Nazis, regardless of the context. 50 years after World War II they were angry that a Nazi was simply on the screen.


What did they think of the history channel?

I mean, up until ~10 years ago, it should have just been called the hitlery channel.
 
2013-07-18 11:34:16 AM

Bontesla: Why shouldn't they show us the banality of evil? Showing a mug shot doesn't illustrate that point as effectively.


Hey, I agree with you. Was just mentioning how some people could see the "rockstar" thing.
 
2013-07-18 11:34:52 AM

ph0rk: tripleseven: Magazines are not dead.  There's actually been an uptick lately.

Uptick as in they are becoming profitable again, or uptick like cassette tapes and vinyl?


Subscription data has risen.  However, newsstand sales fell.  They've always been shiatty anyway.
 
2013-07-18 11:35:02 AM

louiedog: When I was a kid I remember someone telling me that I shouldn't play Wolfenstein 3D because it depicted Nazis, regardless of the context. 50 years after World War II they were angry that a Nazi was simply on the screen.


But you got to shoot them in the face!
 
2013-07-18 11:35:18 AM

mafiageek1980: It was a bad move having him on the cover, but not a bad move to write an article about it.


Oddly enough, I don't think many people are complaining about the article having been written, but are instead complaining about the glamorizing on the cover...
 
2013-07-18 11:35:59 AM

tripleseven: ph0rk: tripleseven: Magazines are not dead.  There's actually been an uptick lately.

Uptick as in they are becoming profitable again, or uptick like cassette tapes and vinyl?

Subscription data has risen.  However, newsstand sales fell.  They've always been shiatty anyway.


As I understand it, it is the subs that sell them ads, as they actually know something about the subscribers.
 
2013-07-18 11:36:03 AM
Kinda weird/intresting how the family never went to any of the matches.
 
2013-07-18 11:36:08 AM
OMG!!!  Who the hell cares!!
 
2013-07-18 11:36:30 AM

mafiageek1980: DigitalSorceress: I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.

THIS.

It was a bad move having him on the cover, but not a bad move to write an article about it.


still less tacky then CNN replaying uncensored video of the explosions again and again during prime time.
 
2013-07-18 11:37:09 AM

Opposable Thumb: OMG!!!  Who the hell cares!!


Thanks!

I mean, my day would have been devastatingly boring without your keen insight.
 
2013-07-18 11:38:20 AM

IamAwake: mafiageek1980: It was a bad move having him on the cover, but not a bad move to write an article about it.

Oddly enough, I don't think many people are complaining about the article having been written, but are instead complaining about the glamorizing on the cover...


FFS, They call him a monster on the cover - don't just look at the cropped square images that pop up in facebook, etc.
 
2013-07-18 11:40:28 AM

IamAwake: mafiageek1980: It was a bad move having him on the cover, but not a bad move to write an article about it.

Oddly enough, I don't think many people are complaining about the article having been written, but are instead complaining about the glamorizing on the cover...


What is glamorous about republishing the same picture that's been everywhere with a caption identifying him as a "monster"
 
2013-07-18 11:43:39 AM
I remember that Rolling Stone magazine has never shied away from putting pictures of infamous people on their cover. Didn't they put Charles Manson and Osama bin Ladin on their cover as well?

Good on them for keeping the pot stirred. While the rest of the media desperately tries to keep us occupied with *anything but* the exponentially-growing reach of Big Brother, a few select outlets keep focus where it should be, even if only tangentially.
 
2013-07-18 11:49:23 AM

HAMMERTOE: I remember that Rolling Stone magazine has never shied away from putting pictures of infamous people on their cover. Didn't they put Charles Manson and Osama bin Ladin on their cover as well?

Good on them for keeping the pot stirred. While the rest of the media desperately tries to keep us occupied with *anything but* the exponentially-growing reach of Big Brother, a few select outlets keep focus where it should be, even if only tangentially.


As a reminder, the issue is not that he was on the cover, but in a made-up, glorified, rock-star way.  The other shots shown in this thread of, for example, Manson and Simpson, are not nearly as pretty.
 
2013-07-18 11:49:26 AM

Inchoate: You don't expect your chill stoner buddy to start blowing off limbs for the glory of Allah.


When they think 9/11 was both an inside job and justifiable action of muslims because they are all one while claiming Islam is only about peace...yeah I do.
 
2013-07-18 11:49:30 AM

Wendy's Chili: Adam Lanza was "the same age as their readers" too. How come he never got the rock star treatment?


Ted Nugent already has that title for the NRA.
 
2013-07-18 11:51:30 AM

Bontesla: Why shouldn't they show us the banality of evil?


They could have at least drawn devil horns and a Snidely Whiplash mustache on him. Without them, I have no idea how to feel about this guy.
 
2013-07-18 11:56:44 AM

Bullseyed: Can't say you're alone though. Bill Clinton allowed it to happen after all.


Exactly.  What was he thinking when he thought he could train and arm these terrorists to fight the Russians without dire consequences.  At least the Bush's business relationship with the bin Laden family protected us from something awful like the USS Cole bombing to occur.
 
2013-07-18 11:57:17 AM

ph0rk: tripleseven: Magazines are not dead.  There's actually been an uptick lately.

Uptick as in they are becoming profitable again, or uptick like cassette tapes and vinyl?


I'm pretty sure Rolling Stone is profitable, and their circulation has never been higher.
 
2013-07-18 11:57:36 AM

mafiageek1980: DigitalSorceress: I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.

THIS.

It was a bad move having him on the cover, but not a bad move to write an article about it.


The picture on the cover adds to the article.
 
2013-07-18 11:59:51 AM

Inchoate: Bontesla: Why shouldn't they show us the banality of evil? Showing a mug shot doesn't illustrate that point as effectively.

Hey, I agree with you. Was just mentioning how some people could see the "rockstar" thing.


Had Rolling Stones drawn a Hitler mustache - we'd be having a different discussion. I think RS made the right call.
 
2013-07-18 12:02:27 PM

UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: Bontesla: Why shouldn't they show us the banality of evil?

They could have at least drawn devil horns and a Snidely Whiplash mustache on him. Without them, I have no idea how to feel about this guy.


I think you nailed much of this angst on the head. People like having a cartoonish view of the villain.
 
2013-07-18 12:08:21 PM

Voiceofreason01: MyRandomName: Not a very interesting article.

Which you clearly didn't read.


Because I didn't find it interesting? I didn't find enders game interesting either. Shame on me.

Most of these facts in the story were found in various other stories. Sorry I don't find it interesting to explain away someone's actions.
 
2013-07-18 12:10:42 PM

liam76: Inchoate: You don't expect your chill stoner buddy to start blowing off limbs for the glory of Allah.

When they think 9/11 was both an inside job and justifiable action of muslims because they are all one while claiming Islam is only about peace...yeah I do.


9/11 troofers and "America had it coming ergo it's totally cool to murder thousands of people for the lulz" idiots are, depressingly, not that uncommon. However, while they may make excuses for violent crimes, they are rarely anything other than asshole ITGs running their mouths.

"Islam is peaceful" and the assertion of a unified Muslim connection/community are standard claims of Muslims, both crazy and not. It doesn't indicate a dangerous person except to those WUH OH ISLAM IS 100% EVIL nutters.

None of these things in isolation is a red flag. Together, and with the other circumstances of Jahar's life considered, they well could be. But not many of his friends knew all the information, or asked, or seemed especially worried. Lots of "warning signs" only seem like those after the fact, when we can easily assume what the person meant by them.

(also: I find it ironic that the Islamist guys in Dagestan kept trying to tell Tamerlan to simmer the fark down and focus on actually important things)
 
2013-07-18 12:11:06 PM

SpectroBoy: So what your saying is:


No, what I'm saying is that "journalists" shouldn't fawn over politicians.  It's very dangerous.  I too had a "free" subscription somehow and I read some of the first couple issues.  It wasn't journalism, it was propaganda.  I found it to be totally irresponsible and unethical given their target audience of young people.
They're supposed to be watchdogs, not lapdogs.

ROLLING STONE
Special "Isn't the President Great" Edition with foldout "Lick n' Suck" Obama-phallus centerfold
 
2013-07-18 12:11:25 PM

apotheosis27: Snort: Fark you subby!  I LOVE being outraged.

It is the only way I feel alive in this empty life of mine.

/FAVORITED


Have you thought of taking up religion?
 
2013-07-18 12:12:47 PM

MyRandomName: Most of these facts in the story were found in various other stories. Sorry I don't find it interesting to explain away someone's actions.


Ohhhhh, you're one of those people that has difficulty distinguishing "understand the causes of" and "make excuses for". You could clean up in the next Republican primary.
 
2013-07-18 12:13:56 PM
It's sad the number of people that don't understand what innocent until proven guilty actually means. It doesn't mean somebody actually didn't do what they're accused of. It doesn't change facts and has no baring on what people are allowed to believe. You can be innocent, but found guilty and vice versa. Do you really think the opinion of 12 random people actually alters reality?
 
2013-07-18 12:26:17 PM
Rolling Stone: trying to stay relevant in 2013.
 
2013-07-18 12:26:55 PM
The "alledged" word is for the courts and the media.

He is a terrorist.
 
2013-07-18 12:27:00 PM

MyRandomName: Not a very interesting article. Typical blame everyone but the individual liberal philosophy. The question is, if nobody is responsible for their own actions, how do you blame it on other people who apparently are not responsible for their actions.


There is a difference between understanding motive and absolving blame.  Conservatives are too quick to call anyone who does anything wrong an "evil doer" without trying to figure out their motivations.  At no point does Rolling Stone say that Johar is not responsible, but they do explain his history.
 
2013-07-18 12:33:43 PM
"..The fact that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is young, and in the same age group as many of our readers"

Do people under 25 even know what a magazine is, or read?  isn't their reader base like 25-40.
 
2013-07-18 12:51:58 PM

wambu: The "alledged" word is for the courts and the media.

He is a terrorist.


Alleged even.
 
2013-07-18 12:53:14 PM
Failed by his family? Fell into radical Islam? No thanks, I will pass. Excusing away any choice made to embrace ridiculous ancient myths and let them twist you into a bellicose monster is something I can do without.

You should to, but to each his own.
 
2013-07-18 01:01:53 PM

garkola: Rolling Stone: trying to stay relevant in 2013.


Circulation numbers indicate that RS is as relevant as ever, and as long as they try to keep it that way by using ressources on producing in-depth investigative reporting, they deserve success. It's not like there are lots of other journalistic publications lining up to do the same.
 
2013-07-18 01:06:45 PM

Owangotang: Failed by his family? Fell into radical Islam? No thanks, I will pass. Excusing away any choice made to embrace ridiculous ancient myths and let them twist you into a bellicose monster is something I can do without.

You should to, but to each his own.


Wow, I get to C&P my post from less than an hour ago:
Ohhhhh, you're one of those people that has difficulty distinguishing "understand the causes of" and "make excuses for". You could clean up in the next Republican primary.
 
2013-07-18 01:09:17 PM

flynn80: "..The fact that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is young, and in the same age group as many of our readers"

Do people under 25 even know what a magazine is, or read?  isn't their reader base like 25-40.


A quarter of their readers are under 25.

img.photobucket.com
 
2013-07-18 01:10:57 PM

Dansker: garkola: Rolling Stone: trying to stay relevant in 2013.

Circulation numbers indicate that RS is as relevant as ever, and as long as they try to keep it that way by using ressources on producing in-depth investigative reporting, they deserve success. It's not like there are lots of other journalistic publications lining up to do the same.


Vanity Fair is pretty decent.
 
2013-07-18 01:18:17 PM
There were many things about Jahar that his friends and teachers didn't know - something not altogether unusual for immigrant children, who can live highly bifurcated lives, toggling back and forth between their ethnic and American selves.

There is no racism like clueless left-wing racism.
 
2013-07-18 01:21:17 PM
Where was the outrage when Fox Nation used the photo?

http://www.newscorpse.com/ncWP/?p=10173
 
2013-07-18 01:31:09 PM

sethen320: sigdiamond2000: Lexx: Perfect example of the poutrage culture.

Also a perfect example of how most people are absolutely incapable of allowing nuanced concepts to enter their brains, and how tragedy must be packaged such that it confirms existing stereotypes about the nature of evil.

This is a good book on a similar subject:

[www.esquire.com image 240x365]


I have been wanting to read that but have not had time.  Is it good?

If you want to have one concise collection of bad stuff to get outraged about this is a good book too.  It covers a lot of the early events which have laid the foundation for what we are dealing with today.  A great read.  It will also make you think twice every time you see a duffel bag.


Wow, thanks man. I was an Ames fan way back in the early Exile days but sort of lost track of what he was up to. I'll definitely buy that book.

And yes, "Columbine" is a great read.
 
2013-07-18 01:36:07 PM
Subby you lost me at "alleged"
 
2013-07-18 01:37:27 PM

tripleseven: Dansker: garkola: Rolling Stone: trying to stay relevant in 2013.

Circulation numbers indicate that RS is as relevant as ever, and as long as they try to keep it that way by using ressources on producing in-depth investigative reporting, they deserve success. It's not like there are lots of other journalistic publications lining up to do the same.

Vanity Fair is pretty decent.


And there are other exceptions from the rule, but I'll challenge anyone to name more than a handful that even try, on this list.
 
2013-07-18 01:39:42 PM

keden7: Lor M. Ipsum: I understand why some people (especially those directly affected by the violence of the Boston Marathon bombing) would be disgusted by *any* image of the bomber, but I rather like the photo on the cover because it forces us to perceive the bomber as a human being, and that can help facilitate a discussion on what caused a human being to do such a disgusting act of inhumanity.

It's like the discussion of where to bury his brother.  Many people protested that we should just flush it down the shiatter or some other inhumane act of burial, but I think that is disingenuous to the fact that we have more in common with these terrorists than most of us would like to believe.

Good enough point. But couldn't they have done that on the inside of the magazine instead of glorifying him on the front cover? If they were really good at what they are supposed to be doing (writing), they could have made that point without doing that.  We glorify the villians in our society, never the victims.  Most of us still can't name one victim from 9-11, but we know the names of the terrorists.  The media focuses on the negative and forgets the whole lives of those who were cut short by idiocy and hatred. It's just sad.


I can't name either victim or perp. Not a single one.

/Rougly equal to the amount of farks given
 
2013-07-18 01:42:44 PM
Subby, look at the list of "banned books" people have a collective shiat over without reading.

Why should this be any different?
 
2013-07-18 01:45:15 PM
Too long; didn't bleed.
 
2013-07-18 01:48:16 PM

Mouser: There were many things about Jahar that his friends and teachers didn't know - something not altogether unusual for immigrant children, who can live highly bifurcated lives, toggling back and forth between their ethnic and American selves.

There is no racism like clueless left-wing racism.


lol what
 
2013-07-18 01:48:39 PM
FFS, it's not a glamor shot, it's a farking selfie, probably with a preset filter on instragram.

/your talking points are bad and you should feel bad
//decent article
 
2013-07-18 02:18:32 PM
FTA:

For all of their city's collective angst and community processing and resolutions of being "one Cambridge," the reality is that none of Jahar's friends had any idea he was unhappy, and they really didn't know he had any issues in his family other than, perhaps, his parents' divorce, which was kind of normal.

This is an effect of the life electronic, where human interaction is supplanted with Twitter, with Facebook, and with Fark. Communication and understanding are less important than impression and presence. All becomes affect. The people are hidden inside their shells and persona is all we see.

But it's so comfortable that way, isn't it?
 
gad
2013-07-18 02:20:16 PM
Fark you right back. And Frak the magazine and frak/fark the article. If they don't have the common sense to know common sense they get no support, no eyeballs, no subscription. Nothing but derision. Good day to you sir.
 
2013-07-18 02:22:25 PM

DigitalSorceress: I don't question the article - but to give him a front page shot on Rolling Stone looking like a rock star? I can see why some folks are a bit bothered by it.


The same picture the New York Times used in its article. Were you bothered by it then?
 
2013-07-18 02:32:57 PM

gad: Fark you right back. And Frak the magazine and frak/fark the article. If they don't have the common sense to know common sense they get no support, no eyeballs, no subscription. Nothing but derision. Good day to you sir.


is it not also common sense to seek out answers to seemingly meaningless actions in order to better understand the person? We can prevent such tragedies from happening and if you want us to be "sensitive" to the victims of this crime, then isn't it being sensitive to learn and understand how something like this happens in order to prevent less victims of these crimes?
 
2013-07-18 02:35:02 PM
Now it's all designed
To blow our minds
But our minds won't really be blown
Like the blow that'll getcha
When you get your picture
On the cover of the Rollin' Stone

Wanna see my picture on the cover
Wanna buy five copies for my mother
Wanna see my smiling face
On the cover the cover of the Rollin' Stone

-Shel Silverstein
 
2013-07-18 02:37:10 PM

ongbok: Very good article.

People need to take notice of this article because what led him into radicalism, losing his support system, which didn't seem like the most stable of support systems to begin with, feeling isolated and turning to a person for support that wasn't very stable himself (his brother) for support, are things that really do affect young people everyday. Whether it be for radical movements, gangs, prostitution, assholes look for these types of people that are going through these things to exploit. All of this outrage about Rolling Stone is giving him the rockstar treatment is just people burying their heads in the sand and ignoring this fact.


I just finished reading it and I have simliar feelings about it. He needed help and support, he didn't have it, making him more easily influenced by his asshole older brother. I'm not saying he's innocent, but the article did a damn good job at looking at the kid before, during, and after.

That being said, having him on the cover was just ASKING for people to be pissed off and for them to lose sales.
 
2013-07-18 02:44:00 PM
fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net
 
2013-07-18 03:33:35 PM

Mr_Fabulous: way south: There are lots of gray figures in current events that deserve the benefit of a doubt.
A mad bomber with a brother complex who drops explosives at the feet of an eight year old isn't one of them.

Is that the source of the outrage here? Are people actually believing that RS's angle is "this terrorist deserves the benefit of the doubt"? That they're trying to elicit sympathy for him?

I'm being serious... is that what you actually believe is being done here?


It should be alaraming. It's not at all alarming.

Lt. Cheese Weasel: [fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net image 698x960]


Forget journalism. MOAR GRIEF PORN!!!
 
2013-07-18 03:42:45 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: [fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net image 698x960]


And the outrage would be "how dare you use the image of a sweet innocent victim to sell magazines!" BOYCOTT!!
 
2013-07-18 03:44:52 PM

Wingchild: This is an effect of the life electronic, where human interaction is supplanted with Twitter, with Facebook, and with Fark. Communication and understanding are less important than impression and presence. All becomes affect. The people are hidden inside their shells and persona is all we see.


Groups of shallowly-connected friends have existed since time immemorial.
 
2013-07-18 04:50:15 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: [fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net image 698x960]


Much better. Thanks.
 
2013-07-18 07:02:27 PM

Inchoate: liam76: Inchoate: You don't expect your chill stoner buddy to start blowing off limbs for the glory of Allah.

When they think 9/11 was both an inside job and justifiable action of muslims because they are all one while claiming Islam is only about peace...yeah I do.

9/11 troofers and "America had it coming ergo it's totally cool to murder thousands of people for the lulz" idiots are, depressingly, not that uncommon. However, while they may make excuses for violent crimes, they are rarely anything other than asshole ITGs running their mouths.

"Islam is peaceful" and the assertion of a unified Muslim connection/community are standard claims of Muslims, both crazy and not. It doesn't indicate a dangerous person except to those WUH OH ISLAM IS 100% EVIL nutters.

None of these things in isolation is a red flag. Together, and with the other circumstances of Jahar's life considered, they well could be. But not many of his friends knew all the information, or asked, or seemed especially worried. Lots of "warning signs" only seem like those after the fact, when we can easily assume what the person meant by them.

(also: I find it ironic that the Islamist guys in Dagestan kept trying to tell Tamerlan to simmer the fark down and focus on actually important things)


Good point about not all his friends knowing.

When they claim it is peaceful, then say it was ok for them to do those things, yeah they are a nutter.
 
2013-07-18 10:38:14 PM

jfivealive: Well in all fairness, he did rock boston


He blew up Boston like nobody but the Blackhawks could do.

/so sick of this topic
//going to joke about it instead of point out this was a Truther gone too far
///farking Truthers
 
2013-07-19 08:43:58 AM
wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net
 
Displayed 196 of 196 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report