Rolling Stone

Salazar

New Member
Most people are mad at Rolling Stone magazine for putting the Boston Bomber on the cover, but I heard an interesting argument this morning for why we shouldn't be mad. The commentator said that putting him on the cover humanizes him and that is exactly what we need to do. Making him into a monster is wrong. We need to recognize that doe-eyed young men with good grades and lots of friends can do something like this so we can start working toward a solution to prevent future tragedies.

I only agree with that to a certain extent and I still feel like putting him on the cover was wrong, but I thought it was a good argument.
 

BigPapa

New Member
Ok, so my question is this-why is okay for The New York Times to put the very same picture on the cover of their newspaper? If you can't answer that then you really have no place to be offended by it in my opinion.
 

polamalu43

New Member
What? I don't think it's okay for either to put his picture on the cover. I loved that the photographer from the scene (police officer) leaked the bloodied pictures from the night he was arrested.
 

Bear

New Member
I think the story needed to be told and what picture were they supposed to use? It's not like they are doing photo shoots in jail. Rolling Stone could have done the story without the picture, but in the end what does it really matter?
 

Sinbian

New Member
Why would it matter anyway?! It's news, why would they be gentle about reporting the news? It's the news not how you would like the news.
 

BigPapa

New Member
Sinbian, you hit it right on the head. It's the news. People have gotten so used to being spoon fed the warped "PC" news we usually get that when something real hits, we get upset by it. The fact that something in the system failed this kid miserably is what should offend us, not a picture.
 

olderthandirt

New Member
The New York Times is a legitimate news source so a photo is appropriate. Rolling Stone is supposed to be about the music industry, making the cover choice a blatant attempt at riding on controversy. Motives do make a difference.

As to humanizing him, I disagree. He IS a monster. Anyone who can do that to random strangers, including children, is a monster. I don't care what color his eyes or skin are.
 
Top