Amazing photos of Tsarnaev's apprehension

[mtangelsfan]

Trayvon blew up a bunch of people in Boston?

[HaloCory22]

No, but anyone can be made out to be whoever the media wants them to be. One statement, one photo, one action can spin anything into whatever you want.

[Brandon]

Wouldn't have been my choice. I just find it peculiar when Facebook blows up with hate but these people didn't attack Time for their Bin Laden cover which was similar in tone. The same could be said for other ruthless dictators.

I don't care to read the article, but people's position that have seem to iterate that they are portraying him pre attack with peer interviews with a bigger goal of understanding how what seemed to be a normal kid turned into a monster. It's to create a deeper understanding of who or how a terrorist here can be created. It's about understanding a different type of terrorism, but people are focused on the picture. But the picture fits the article and purpose.

I won't deny there was likely a profit or hype angle with this picture, but I don't agree with the people that pick and choose when they are offended.

I have yet to see people boycott the NY Times which also used a personal pic of him when reporting the story.

[mtangelsfan]

Of course it can be done.  The argument is whether it should be done.

 

Not to mention, the two stories have nothing to do with one another other than the media went bat-shit crazy over both.

[mtangelsfan]

Brandon, unless I'm mistaken Time Magazine did take a bunch of heat for the Bin Laden cover.

 

My problem with RS is they first say "This is a serious article, serious journalism", then they explain the cover with "hey, we aren't Time magazine, we are an entertaiment magazine."

 

Regardless, they are way more things in this world to be upset about.  I just didn't care for the taste level.

[Brandon]

I also think this is another media controlled frenzy that is creating a world of cynical assholes. Before social media people had opinions and that was it and accepted, even if different. Now you just see people arguing for the sake of it or updating whatever social media site just incite arguments and for whatever ego trip reason put others down or engage others in a combative manner.

But I'm also in the demographic that grew up and saw the evolution of friendly chat to the now personal feelings people have to these sites. just a trip to see how people's feelings differ on subjects based on media play.

[TobiasFunke]

If the article is about how terrorism isn't just acted out by the baddies with beard in the Middle East but now possibly the teen next door and how does a selfie taking teenager in America become a terrorist, I would put the glamour selfie on the cover also. It goes with the content of the article which most people seem to not pay attention to.

[Brandon]

Brandon, unless I'm mistaken Time Magazine did take a bunch of heat for the Bin Laden cover.

My problem with RS is they first say "This is a serious article, serious journalism", then they explain the cover with "hey, we aren't Time magazine, we are an entertaiment magazine."

Regardless, they are way more things in this world to be upset about. I just didn't care for the taste level.

1. I'm uncertain as well. However, personally, I have not come across anyone upset. I remember it being controversial, but discourse was tied to that aspect opposed to people being actually upset like I've seen elsewhere. This has actually been one of the few places people just have an opinion, go to the Rolling Stone Facebook (which for whatever random reason I'm friends with) and all hell breaks loose.

2. Didn't read that, but changing stance based on public opinion is always a losing proposition. I just read the initial response where they were sticking to their journalistic duties. I appreciate when any publication delves deeper or has an angle at some deeper meaning of situations.

3. Agreed.

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

I realize RS writes about more than just music and they've had good articles over the years but I don't see the need to put him on the cover.  That said I agree that their purpose was to get attention and while some stores are refusing to carry this particular issue its got RS a lot of press. 

[Brandon]

If the article is about how terrorism isn't just acted out by the baddies with beard in the Middle East but now possibly the teen next door and how does a selfie taking teenager in America become a terrorist, I would put the glamour selfie on the cover also. It goes with the content of the article which most people seem to not pay attention to.

You are correct.

It's funny, yesterday was all sorts of outrage. But people have seemed to have read the article and there is now a balance with the postings around the web.

I don't think a lot of people complaining about the pic actually read the article.

[mtangelsfan]

I guess another way of looking at this is that people are experssing their displeasure correctly.  Nobody is calling for the editor to be killed, or for RS to be closed, or for every copy to be burned.  Well, at least 99% of the population (there is always the crazy few)

 

Somebody did something, other people didn't like and said so.

 

That's America.

[HaloFan85]

If the article is about how terrorism isn't just acted out by the baddies with beard in the Middle East but now possibly the teen next door and how does a selfie taking teenager in America become a terrorist, I would put the glamour selfie on the cover also. It goes with the content of the article which most people seem to not pay attention to.

Without having read the article, I'm sure that's what it's all about.  Instead of the face of an innocent looking kid, some people would rather see a picture of the stereotypical terrorist screaming out for jihad.

 

From all accounts from friends and former classmates, he was a well liked kid and was just like everyone else.  RS already stated most of their readers are of the same age group, so it's easy to understand the reason for the story and the cover.  The kid wasn't born a terrorist like a lot of people want to believe and RS obviously wants its young readers to know how or why this kid turned out the way he did.

 

I'm getting tired of hearing people always ask "why" and then blast someone for trying to answer that question for them like Rolling Stone is trying to do.

[mtangelsfan]

Please, RS absolutely knew that some people (especially in Boston, including the officer who was shot) would be offended by the picture.  They put sales and publicity ahead of that.  They made a calculated decision that was pocketbook related.

 

Until they man up and admit that, their "why" is bullcrap.

[TobiasFunke]

You're always going to anger someone with whatever decision you make. RS did what was relevant to the topic at hand. It makes more sense to have that picture than some mug shot.

[mtangelsfan]

IMO, that somebody shouldn't be the victims of a terrorist attack.

[TobiasFunke]

I understand, but if that's the case and we don't want to offend by reminding the victims about the horrible person that committed the crime to them then it shouldn't be on any magazine, newspaper, tv show, Etc.

[mtangelsfan]

Again, it's the way he was depicted.  A glammed up pretty boy.  It's not like he already doesn't have a bunch of 14 year girls going goo goo after him.

[Tank]

I was "Person Of The Year" for 2006.

I found a video of you. Hope you don't mind me sharing it with everyone here.

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/its-pat/n10133/

[TobiasFunke]

Again, it's the way he was depicted. A glammed up pretty boy. It's not like he already doesn't have a bunch of 14 year girls going goo goo after him.

The way he was depicted completely related to the content of the article. No other picture of the guy would have made sense. All kids his age nowadays takes selfies like that and think they're the shit. If a normal kid like him can commit an act of terror, then any other normal suburbanite can.

[arch stanton]

I just finished reading the article. The photo does seem to fit the theme well enough and as was pointed on the RS website the NY Times used the exact same photo in May.

 

To me, the key issue that the article discussed was group identity. I've often been surprised by how strongly some people need to identify with a group whether it's ethnic, national, religious, political, or whatever and how bitter they become to perceived slights or wrongs against their pet groups. When you tack on a feeling of helplessness or hopelessness then you have a recipe for someone to act out in a pretty cowardly manor against innocent targets.