Boston Marathon bombing

[max power]

Holy fake crucifixion, the english language says that the word is inhumane. If you are going to mock the position, you should at least now how to spell it. Holy shit! Learn the english language if you want to live in this country..

The word you are looking for is know. K N O W. It's a basic word in the English language. Learn it.

[Pokey]

Guess who is on the front cover of the latest issue of Rolling Stone? VILE.......

Edited July 17, 2013 by Pokey

[Steve Butters]

Rolling Stones magazine can go get fucked.

[max power]

Rolling Stone has always been a worthless hippie rag.

Their sales have gone the shitter in the last 10 years and they're just trying to get exposure.

[John]

lol way to judge a magazine by its cover.

 

i saw a bunch of people on twitter crying about rolling stone... and to be honest, i don't really get it... so we can't show a photo of this guy ever now? 

 

where was the outrage when every TV news network was showing his photo ad nauseum? or when the NYT used the exact same photo on their front page? where is your phony outrage at EVERY FUCKING NEWS OUTLET showing a picture of the RS cover?

 

where was your fake indignation when this TIME issue came out?

 

 

or this one

 

 

or this Life magazine?

 

 

 

if you skip past the bieber and zac efron shit, there are lots of well written and thought provoking articles in rolling stone. they are one of the few media outlets still doing real in depth investigative journalism. its just ridiculous to me that people are crying about this and they haven't even read the article yet... are they mad because he doesn't look how we expect a "terrorist" to look? brown skin with a turban?

Edited July 17, 2013 by John

[max power]

I find it annoying because it's supposed to be a music magazine. Why the fuck does every magazine need to report every detail on every terrorist ever known to man? Is good housekeeping going to run an article about him next week?

If the media would quit publicizing these dick bags and their causes then maybe they would quit doing this shit.

[baptizo]

Rolling Stone chooses to go with a fluff pic to glorify what?  How this guy became deluded and misguided somewhere along the way? 

 

That cover was done in bad taste, period, and only proves how the magazine is becoming irrelevant. 

[John]

I find it annoying because it's supposed to be a music magazine. Why the fuck does every magazine need to report every detail on every terrorist ever known to man? Is good housekeeping going to run an article about him next week?

If the media would quit publicizing these dick bags and their causes then maybe they would quit doing this shit.

 

regarding the first part, rolling stone has never been solely about music, they have always had a focus on politics as well as general pop culture. they've been doing political reporting for YEARS... Hunter S. Thompson, Joe Klein, PJ O'Rourke, Matt Taibbi, Tim Dickinson, Janet Reitman... the list goes on.

 

now, they have definitely had much more of a music focus in the past years, but the political writings never went away completely.

 

for the second part, i really doubt that terrorists motives are to get on the cover of a magazine... but who knows, i guess ANYTHING is possible... i feel that their motives are usually much more political than that, and that most could really care less about media coverage.

 

 

 

Rolling Stone chooses to go with a fluff pic to glorify what?  How this guy became deluded and misguided somewhere along the way? 

 

That cover was done in bad taste, period, and only proves how the magazine is becoming irrelevant. 

 

Well, first, its a photo that has been used in MULTIPLE other news reports but I haven't seen any outrage for them...

 

Second, the subtitle of the article clearly says: How a popular, promising student was failed by his family, fell into radical islam and became a monster so yeah, i'd guess that's what the article is about.

 

I doubt it's painting him in a good light. It's most likely talking about how he got to this point. Is that not something worth knowing? I think its important to learn how the minds of killers function, and how they got to such a dangerous place and frame of mind.  it makes us informed, and it can definitely help us take precautions in the future. precautions either in how we interact with people, or what kind of warning signs to look for. knowledge is power is it not? 

 

personally, i feel that if you  look at this picture and see a glamourized celebrity instead of a monster, then it isn't rolling stone who has the problem. its YOU.  (i do not mean you personally, just the general you)

 

I kind of agree with what  Eric Wemple from the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/07/17/to-rolling-stone-detractors-please/) wrote (bold emphasis mine)

 

 

 

*Presumably the protesters would have a tabloid treatment in which Rolling Stone would place horns on Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Perhaps that would have made this nonsense go away.

*This is good journalism, as the photo depicts the same Dzhokhar Tsarnaev that The Post and the New York Times — and others — depicted in deeply reported pieces. That is, a regular, good guy with friends, interests and activities — a “joker,” even.

*Showing this alleged bomber in his full humanity makes him appear even more menacing.

*Some are saying that Rolling Stone is exploiting this image — this story — for commercial gain. Well, Rolling Stone is a magazine. It exploits all its stories for commercial gain, some more effectively than others.

Edited July 17, 2013 by John

[Pokey]

Many on this forum are not gonna agree with you John.

[baptizo]

 

 

regarding the first part, rolling stone has never been solely about music, they have always had a focus on politics as well as general pop culture. they've been doing political reporting for YEARS... Hunter S. Thompson, Joe Klein, PJ O'Rourke, Matt Taibbi, Tim Dickinson, Janet Reitman... the list goes on.

 

now, they have definitely had much more of a music focus in the past years, but the political writings never went away completely.

 

for the second part, i really doubt that terrorists motives are to get on the cover of a magazine... but who knows, i guess ANYTHING is possible... i feel that their motives are usually much more political than that, and that most could really care less about media coverage.

 

 

 

 

Well, first, its a photo that has been used in MULTIPLE other news reports but I haven't seen any outrage for them...

 

Second, the subtitle of the article clearly says: How a popular, promising student was failed by his family, fell into radical islam and became a monster so yeah, i'd guess that's what the article is about.

 

I doubt it's painting him in a good light. It's most likely talking about how he got to this point. Is that not something worth knowing? I think its important to learn how the minds of killers function, and how they got to such a dangerous place and frame of mind.  it makes us informed, and it can definitely help us take precautions in the future. precautions either in how we interact with people, or what kind of warning signs to look for. knowledge is power is it not? 

 

personally, i feel that if you  look at this picture and see a glamourized celebrity instead of a monster, then it isn't rolling stone who has the problem. its YOU.  (i do not mean you personally, just the general you)

 

I kind of agree with what  Eric Wemple from the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/07/17/to-rolling-stone-detractors-please/) wrote (bold emphasis mine)

 

 

 

*Presumably the protesters would have a tabloid treatment in which Rolling Stone would place horns on Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Perhaps that would have made this nonsense go away.

*This is good journalism, as the photo depicts the same Dzhokhar Tsarnaev that The Post and the New York Times — and others — depicted in deeply reported pieces. That is, a regular, good guy with friends, interests and activities — a “joker,” even.

*Showing this alleged bomber in his full humanity makes him appear even more menacing.

*Some are saying that Rolling Stone is exploiting this image — this story — for commercial gain. Well, Rolling Stone is a magazine. It exploits all its stories for commercial gain, some more effectively than others.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

You want to psychoanalyze people now based on what they "see" related to the picture?  I see a psychotic murderer.

 

And I don't give a rat's ass what excuses you or others come up with respect to the photo or its use - it is classless.  I'm fully aware of RS's purpose of generating revenue but my point is they're falling further down a hole they'll never recover from if they keep producing garbage like this one.  They deserve to be called out for it and if some choose, to be boycotted because there has to be line of common decency somewhere in journalism.  

 

I also can't imagine anyone with a lick of common sense and decency giving a shit about his "humanity" being revealed - I want to know if he is truly sorry for doing it and since we're speaking about humanity, how about the humanity of those who were killed and wounded by the two of them?  

 

As for "knowledge is power"...without wisdom, it isn't.  

[Cheech]

Many on this forum are not gonna agree with you John.

 

If you wanted an echo chamber, go post on freerepublic.

 

As to the point of Rolling Stone being "irrelevant", it was Matt Taibbi who really started to bring to light the length and breadth of the bullshit that caused (and continues to aggravate) the financial crisis, and trying to bring some accountability to light on it.  For that, he should have fucking schools named after him.

 

Bottom line, this has been done before, and from multiple publishers as John pointed out.  Last I looked this is still a free country, so if you don't like the cover, don't buy the magazine.

[Pokey]

If you wanted an echo chamber, go post on freerepublic.

 

As to the point of Rolling Stone being "irrelevant", it was Matt Taibbi who really started to bring to light the length and breadth of the bullshit that caused (and continues to aggravate) the financial crisis, and trying to bring some accountability to light on it.  For that, he should have fucking schools named after him.

 

Bottom line, this has been done before, and from multiple publishers as John pointed out.  Last I looked this is still a free country, so if you don't like the cover, don't buy the magazine.

I had never heard of "freerepublic" until I just did a Google, and that is not a forum I will be visiting. And I would never buy Rolligstone anyways, has nothing to do with the recent cover.

[magley64]

Don't judge a book by it's cover, but a magazine? Judge the hell out of it...

I enjoyed going back and reading all the erroneous "information" posted in this thread...