'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm- Page 2
'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
FindingNamo
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/22/03
#25'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/17/13 at 11:11pmIsn't it true that most people *don't* buy magazines? Isn't that why they're dropping like flies? How will Rolling Stone know it's not selling issues in a way that differentiates this issue from all the others before it?
#26'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/17/13 at 11:23pm
One word: Tacky
Another word: Tasteless
#27'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/17/13 at 11:27pm
As both a born-and-raised Bostonian and a graduate of BU who once had an on-campus apartment in Kenmore Square not at all far from the bomb location, I had no problem with the cover. It seems absolutely appropriate for the story they are running, which deserves (at least in concept, not execution - I've yet to read it) to be explored for the reasons Henrik put very well.
I also believe they could and should write an excellent piece about the first responders and survivors whose stories are all extremely worthy of recounting. But I in no way believe that the cover of a magazine is in any way an endorsement or glamorization. It is an accurate depiction of the story this issue tells.
I haven't bought an issue of Rolling Stone in years, or any magazine for that matter (I happen to like RS more than the average mag, actually). It did make me curious, though; they do have a very well-earned reputation for hard journalism and longform writing that non-attentive readers might be surprised by. I wonder, how often have any of Matt Taibbi's exemplary works been the cover art and not just a mention on the cover?
FindingNamo
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/22/03
#27'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/17/13 at 11:52pmOccasionally. But this article is nowhere near as good as Taibbi's work.
StockardFan
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/19/08
#28'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 4:24amI don't know that I've ever bought a Rolling Stone magazine.
After Eight
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/5/09
#29'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 6:49am
Vile and sickening.
A piece of garbage glamorizes a piece of garbage on its cover.
Anything to make a buck.
Every store in the country should follow New England's lead and refuse to sell this crud. Not only this issue, but every issue.
Hit 'em in the only place they care about.
Let the rag go under.
#30'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 8:02amThe photo always looked like that but it was a glamor shot by Jahar that has, before this cover was published, been used by the 'Free Jahar' crowd that resembles those fandoms who send fan mail to notorious killers. I get the outrage and RS could have chose a shot that was not originally made with the intention of a kid using the photo to get girls.
henrikegerman
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/29/05
#31'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 8:16am
I don't mean to insult anyone, but this all seems to suggest that the dumbing down of American pop culture is working. That the conspiracy to make and see Americans as too stupid to get the theme of this story, and how the picture is not a glorification of Tsarnaev, but resonates with that theme - is alive and well.
OK. But are we really that stupid?
If the business decision is also part of the provocation angle which goes hand in hand with the point of the article - that this kid looked just like the American kid next door and that Rolling Stone is exploring how this kid became, in the cover's own words, "a monster" - then I have no problem with it.
This picture has appeared on the cover of the Times but there was no outcry. We are infantilizing the readers of Rolling Stone, infantilizing consumers of pop culture and compartmentalizing them off from consumers of hard news, by looking at this cover and crying tasteless and tacky.
Let's stop infantilizing ourselves and start thinking.
Updated On: 7/18/13 at 08:16 AM
#32'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 8:36am
I've done plenty of thinking about this.
The readers of RS, I'd say in general, are not the stupid segment of our population. I'm certainly not stupid (in this matter, anyway). I get the point. Doesn't mean I have to admire the rag for it. I think it's in bad taste.
Yeah, they have a point, but it didn't go over well. Better luck next time. If there is one.
henrikegerman
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/29/05
#33'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 8:44am
I think there might be a next time.
After Eight
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/5/09
#34'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 8:49am
"I don't mean to insult anyone."
If not, you've done a very good job of it. How to succeed in insulting without really trying. Bravo!
It's funny how whenever anyone says that don't mean to insult anone, that's exactly what they end up doing, and what's more, what they very well meant to do.
"Let's stop infantilizing ourselves and start thinking. "
How about following your own advice, that is if you're capable of thought.
How dare you call anyone else "dumb," you with your psycho-babble clichés about the "banality of evil." It's not about the "banality of evil," it's about exploiting evil to make a buck, and the perverse pleasure of spitting in our collective faces.
You're both offensive and clueless. Not the greatest combo.
#35'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 8:50am
The Manson cover - About 45 years ago. Let them wait another half century.
henrikegerman
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/29/05
#36'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 9:10amAfter Eight, my point wasn't that anyone objecting - including those posting here - to the cover is stupid. My point was that many might object to the cover because they assume other Americans are too dumb to look at it without seeing it as something it was not intended to be, not just the readers of Rolling Stone, Jane2, but those who see it on the shelf while checking out at Walgreens
#37'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 9:17am
"not just the readers of Rolling Stone, Jane2, but those who see it on the shelf while checking out at Walgreens"
I believe Walgreens is one of the chains that won't carry it.
Anyway, it's still all about money. The dummies that see it in other stores while checking out might just buy it to see what it's all about.
#38'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 9:44amThe Manson cover was not originally photographed by Manson himself and posted on the internet to have girls look at it and think, 'he's cute'. That Manson cover also seems to highlight the danger of the man. Nobody will look at the Tsarnaev cover and think 'danger'. Not because they're dumb and could not tell him from a member of One Direction, but that there is confusion as to what RS seeks in choosing that specific photo out of many photos that became available for their cover story.
Brian07663NJ
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/21/06
#39'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 10:01am
As the Devil's Advocate... What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
#40'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 10:05am? there hasn't been a crime.
henrikegerman
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/29/05
#41'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 10:07am
"The Manson cover was not originally photographed by Manson himself and posted on the internet to have girls look at it and think, 'he's cute'. That Manson cover also seems to highlight the danger of the man. Nobody will look at the Tsarnaev cover and think 'danger'. "
Exactly. That is precisely the point of this exploration of who Tsarnaev is, was and what he became; which is very different than who Manson is, was and what he became. It is jarring and uncomfortable to see Tsarnaev as that kid who took this cute shot of himself to impress girls. Is is jarring and uncomfortable to see Tsarnaev and identify him with an ordinary American kid, something we would hardly do with Manson. They are two different people who did very horrible things.
Your response is exactly the response the story is asking for, an important realization, underscoring the important question being asked - how did this kid, whose danger was so unnoticeable, whose character seemed so ordinary, become this murderer.
#42'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 10:18am
"It is jarring and uncomfortable to see Tsarnaev as that kid who took this cute shot of himself to impress girls. Is is jarring and uncomfortable to see Tsarnaev and identify him with an ordinary American kid, something we would hardly do with Manson. "
You make a lot of general judgments about people. I never seem to fit into your descriptions. I don't find it jarring nor uncomfortable in the least. I am not so stupid as to think there's a certain "look" to a criminal. Maybe you're the naif.
#43'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 10:42am
The point of the cover is to get publicity. Plain and simple.
I'm not even sure they expected to make a huge profit on this issue. It seems all they want is to stir the pot and get noticed.
That's why it's tacky and tasteless. The article could have run in the issue without making the kid a cover boy.
It's a very open wound still. RS knows exactly what its doing. And it has nothing to do with the content of the article (which Namo has already told us isn't all that anyway)
#44'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 10:56amwhat jane2 & tazber wrote so succinctly.
henrikegerman
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/29/05
#45'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 10:57am
"You make a lot of general judgments about people. I never seem to fit into your descriptions. I don't find it jarring nor uncomfortable in the least. I am not so stupid as to think there's a certain "look" to a criminal. Maybe you're the naif."
Jane, I never said you were stupid, jarred or uncomfortable. I am not addressing any one individual's response. I am giving my own response, which is that the cover is provocative, thought-provoking and appropriate, and trying to assess the general outcry and why it doesn't register with me.
I could certainly be failing to persuade. I'm more than willing to consider that I may well be wrong about this. But what exactly about my posts is naive?
#46'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 11:04am
" But what exactly about my posts is naive?"
Assuming it's jarring and uncomfortable..... . And I realize you're not singling me out but you are assuming it in general by making that broad statement. Why do you make that statement? Don't you know that most people have seen other attractive, or innocent looking people who are criminals? You act like this is something new and groundbreaking.
Brian07663NJ
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/21/06
#48'Rolling Stone' Tsarnaev cover stirs firestorm
Posted: 7/18/13 at 11:14amJane2 is correct - there are tons of women (maybe men too but I never heard of that scenario) who are head over heels for guys in jail. They write to them and long for the day they can marry them. They visit them, look beyond the crimes and fantasize about life with them after prison. Even crazier is watching a program on tv about this and the women are stunningly beautiful! They can probably get any guy they want and they are attracted to a convict in prison!
Videos