Really? You don't get it? Not even a little bit?Can someone please explain to me all the outrage over the latest Rolling Stone magazine cover? I just don't get it.
Picture making Osama bin Laden look like a rock star.Can someone please explain to me all the outrage over the latest Rolling Stone magazine cover? I just don't get it.
Yes, let's entrust that knowledge to that cloistered few nannies who take care of things for us.Beyond the insensitivity of it, I'm not a huge fan of making these people celebrities. You are pretty much giving into them by giving them an outlet to get their message out. I'm sick of these psychos getting a pulpit to preach off of while the victims are seemingly ignored.
Understanding whose these people are and what makes them tick are jobs for psychologists and law enforcement but publicizing their message is what they want and will undoubtedly lead others to do the same.
This difference is that Time doesn'tHaven't terriorts been on the cover of TIME magazine for years? What's the difference?
and the suchTsarnaev can lay his pipe bomb into me
I don't have a problem with either one being on the cover but hey free private enterprise, right? funny how the tea party is all up in arms.I bet the liberals would be singing a different tune if George Zimmerman was on the cover.
//threadHaven't t[SIZE=10.5pt]errorists [/SIZE]been on the cover of TIME magazine for years? What's the difference?
I don't get the comparison.I bet the liberals would be singing a different tune if George Zimmerman was on the cover.
At least Charles Manson released albums.I didn't know the terrorist was a musician too..
Right. The difference between Time and RS is that RS likes to portray itself as being hip and edgy, as much or more than it does as a hard news source. People naturally assume that "making a splash", which is what they usually try to do, is what they're also using Tsarnaev's image to do here.Thought it was a feature on Syd Barrett as soon as I saw the cover.
I don't totally get the outrage, but it is a pretty tasteless attempt by RS to renew interest in its magazie.
I smell you. I initially thought it was a feature on the drummer from some band called Marathon Bomber.Thought it was a feature on Syd Barrett as soon as I saw the cover.
Manson was on the cover tooAt least Charles Manson released albums.I didn't know the terrorist was a musician too..
And this is free enterprise at its finest. Consumer lets it voice be heard. Companies respond accordingly.I don't have a problem with either one being on the cover but hey free private enterprise, right? funny how the tea party is all up in arms.I bet the liberals would be singing a different tune if George Zimmerman was on the cover.
that's what I just said, smart guy!And this is free enterprise at its finest. Consumer lets it voice be heard. Companies respond accordingly.I don't have a problem with either one being on the cover but hey free private enterprise, right? funny how the tea party is all up in arms.I bet the liberals would be singing a different tune if George Zimmerman was on the cover.
more upset than this Rockets fan? http://deadspin.com/awesome-little-kid-to-shaq-dont-ever-disrespect-hous-799039348I"M OUTRQGED AND OUTRAGED OUTRASGED AND ANGRTY AND MAD>
People love to complain, in fact there are some that are just not happy unless they are miserable.
And feel free to pack it inside a pressure cooker for her.People love to complain, in fact there are some that are just not happy unless they are miserable.![]()
Pretty much sums up about 90% of the country these days it seems. I also hope they send five copies to his mother.
RS became irrelevant years before they put Don Johnson on the cover with a freakin' guitar.
Creem magazine was THE rock mag in the 80's.
I think either one would be insensitive to the victims in both tragedies but putting the Marathon Bomber on the cover so soon is much worse. Rolling Stone has every right to do it and of course they did it knowing full well what the reaction would be. This was done with the intention to get people talking about their magazine for the first time in a long time. It is crass and very cynical ploy to become relevant again.I don't have a problem with either one being onI bet the liberals would be singing a different
tune if George Zimmerman was on the cover.
the cover but hey free private enterprise, right? funny how the tea party is all up in arms.
As long as they are coated with vag cancer, I don't care.And feel free to pack it inside a pressure cooker for her.People love to complain, in fact there are some that are just not happy unless they are miserable.![]()
Pretty much sums up about 90% of the country these days it seems. I also hope they send five copies to his mother.
RS became irrelevant years before they put Don Johnson on the cover with a freakin' guitar.
Creem magazine was THE rock mag in the 80's.![]()
Much better mag.
Big fan of Creem, but was more of a Circus guy.RS became irrelevant years before they put Don Johnson on the cover with a freakin' guitar.
Creem magazine was THE rock mag in the 80's.![]()
Much better mag.
People love to complain, in fact there are some that are just not happy unless they are miserable.![]()
Pretty much sums up about 90% of the country these days it seems. I also hope they send five copies to his mother.
Circus was also better than RS.RS became irrelevant years before they put Don Johnson on the cover with a freakin' guitar.
Creem magazine was THE rock mag in the 80's.![]()
Much better mag.Big fan of Creem, but was more of a Circus guy.RS became irrelevant years before they put Don Johnson on the cover with a freakin' guitar.
Creem magazine was THE rock mag in the 80's.![]()
Much better mag.
nah, The Source (during hip hop's golden age) fades em allCircus was also better than RS.RS became irrelevant years before they put Don Johnson on the cover with a freakin' guitar.
Creem magazine was THE rock mag in the 80's.![]()
Much better mag.Big fan of Creem, but was more of a Circus guy.RS became irrelevant years before they put Don Johnson on the cover with a freakin' guitar.
Creem magazine was THE rock mag in the 80's.![]()
Much better mag.
Then again since the 70's, Teen Beat may also have been better than RS.
I was more of a Family Circus guyCircus was also better than RS.RS became irrelevant years before they put Don Johnson on the cover with a freakin' guitar.
Creem magazine was THE rock mag in the 80's.![]()
Much better mag.Big fan of Creem, but was more of a Circus guy.RS became irrelevant years before they put Don Johnson on the cover with a freakin' guitar.
Creem magazine was THE rock mag in the 80's.![]()
Much better mag.
Then again since the 70's, Teen Beat may also have been better than RS.
I'm starting to come around. Even Charles Manson made the cover of the Rolling Stone, as did the 0, probably more than once.
The Manson cover was actually worse as it's headline comes across as vapid praise, calling him "the most dangerous man alive".I'm starting to come around. Even Charles Manson made the cover of the Rolling Stone, as did the 0, probably more than once.
ETA: That said, if the bombing happened in your backyard, you might be a bit more sensitive to the issue, too.
It did. Most of my family lives in Boston or is from there.I'm starting to come around. Even Charles Manson made the cover of the Rolling Stone, as did the 0, probably more than once.
ETA: That said, if the bombing happened in your backyard, you might be a bit more sensitive to the issue, too.
Fwiw, I wasn't really addressing you personally, but the rest of the board. take care.It did. Most of my family lives in Boston or is from there.I'm starting to come around. Even Charles Manson made the cover of the Rolling Stone, as did the 0, probably more than once.
ETA: That said, if the bombing happened in your backyard, you might be a bit more sensitive to the issue, too.
funny how the tea party is all up in arms.I bet the liberals would be singing a different tune if George Zimmerman was on the cover.
Big fan of Iggy's sleazier original version over Bowie's sanitized takejohnnycakes said: