Rolling Stone being pilloried in the news
 

They put the surviving Boston Bomber on the cover and the well meaning non illiterati are sh!tting bricks.:rolleyes: Couldn't be because RS has people like Matt Taibi, et al on staff? Now, could it? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

I just knew that you'd bring it over from AK! :D

Thanks, Ty. Sure was getting a bit messy over there. Just being a libby worker bee...:D

The devil takes many forms. Always has always will. I've know some who at first were real lookers turned out to be very ugly people on the inside.



Barney

Linky

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/...world-20130717

OK what's the hoopla? Really??? The actions he did color ones perception anyway. Just goes to show you never know what is going on in ones mind.



Barney

I suspect folks are responding to the quite substantive difference between publishing the photo that RS chose, versus publishing, say, the photo here.

http://www.businessinsider.com/dzhokhar-tsarnaev-2013-4

I think the objection is that the RS photo is awfully flattering for someone who caused so much pain and suffering.

I don't think either photo is particularly "flattering". I think Bob is correct in thinking that perhaps some folks are simply using it as an excuse to attack a traditionally liberal magazine.

A very emotional and reactionary display of bad behaviour, wouldn't you agree?;)

Dave

Dr. Hook should have just bought a couple of pressure cookers, being they couldn't sing for shit anyway.

Chas

Maybe. But RS has already put a semi "Mea culpa" on their web site accompanying the article which seems to side-step the issue of the "glam" photo.

RS has done some excellent journalistic work over the years, but they've also had a history of pursuing magazine covers that elicit a "reaction" from their readers. I guess they shouldn't be too surprised when they get a reaction from some that is negative.