Yeah...it's offensive, who at Rolling Stone thought it was a good idea to glamorize a killer, put him on a cover for the families of those who were murdered and crippled for life by him to be reminded all over again. How insensitive rolling stone, and did your sales spike? That was your real reason for putting him on the cover wasn't it....
Michelle - 11 years ago
Offensive? No. Informative? Yes! Read the cover "How a popular, promising student was failed by his family, fell into radical Islam and became a MONSTER". Seriously I don't think they are glorifying him or his actions. They are simply telling his story. This is what our life has become people. We are living in a scary world, where the unimaginable happens on a daily basis. Why not be informed of how it came to be? I do understand how some people may be offended by this cover story, and I feel and pray for those people. If I recall correctly, from years of schooling, it is Rolling Stone Magazine's First Amendment right to publish this article, and as a US Citizen I do not wish for any of us to be withheld that right.
Stephanie - 11 years ago
Its not the fact that his picture is on the cover of the magazine, so much as it is the type of sultry looking picture that leads to confusion, perhaps if it had been a picture of him being taken away or arrested, it would have resonated better with the image we all have of a terrorist. Many years ago, Charles Manson was also portrayed on the cover of the RS magazine, i'm not sure if there was as much outrage then as there is now about this picture. At the end of the day, we want to read the article, find out why this happened but are clearly sensitive to how its being presented to us. It just feels that the information could have been delivered in a way that empathized more with the victims families and friends.
Carla - 11 years ago
How is information offensive? What is offensive is choosing to remain ignorant. Looking at a cover photo as glorification rather than information is offensive. I haven't read the article, but I will now. It's so much better than having this important story hidden on page 63. Thank you Rolling Stone for having the courage to explain, front and center, why this tragedy happened. Your courage is a tribute to the courage our soldiers relied on when protecting our country, and the courage the survivors of this tragedy are facing day-by-day as they recover from this horrific incident.
Doug - 11 years ago
I'm okay with Rolling Stone doing an article on the bomber because we are all curious what would drive someone to such a heinous act. I think most people, including myself, are offended by him being glorified by having him on the cover.
thelma l hines - 11 years ago
I think the boy is a cute killer. Sometimes I wish I had the same intestinal fortitude.
Julie - 11 years ago
Can't wait to read this controversial article. 'Never judge a book by its cover.'
Julie - 11 years ago
Can't wait to read this controversial article. 'Never judge a book by its cover.'
Overcame52 - 11 years ago
They have no shame. My son fought to keep us free from terrorists. Where is the tribute to them? Oh that's right-not pc enough for them
Neil - 11 years ago
I don't agree with the cover of RS. The magazine itself is in really bad shape and I am surprise it is still around. This was a way to get attention and to sell issues. It is a shame. Also a lot of the comments are a bout him being glorified. Just remember he will probably never see daylight again and I am sure he has no idea about the RS cover. Lets not give him our time by discussing it. Let justice prevail.
Leeann - 11 years ago
Seriously, the world is getting more disturbing by the day… Very sad commentary on our society. Guilty as sin ! I feel bad for the victims ! I wish the media would stop glamorizing these type of people. Outrageous and sad...
Tony - 11 years ago
What scares me the most if other screw heads out there got the message wrong and saw terrorism as a quick way to fame. The article itself also somewhat alluded to the bomber as a victim. It's just wrong.
Tony - 11 years ago
What scares me the most if other screw heads out there got the message wrong and saw terrorism as a quick way to fame. The article itself also somewhat alluded to the bomber as a victim. It's just wrong.
Tony - 11 years ago
What scares me the most if other screw heads out there got the message wrong and saw terrorism as a quick way to fame. The article itself also somewhat alluded to the bomber as a victim. It's just wrong.
Tony - 11 years ago
What scares me the most if other screw heads out there got the message wrong and saw terrorism as a quick way to fame. The article itself also somewhat alluded to the bomber as a victim. It's just wrong.
Brad - 11 years ago
This MF'er doesn't deserve a cover of ANY thing. It's like you're giving him the attention he wanted to begin with.
Mike blanchette - 11 years ago
It's not merely that they showed his picture - it's the way they showed it - giant and boyband like and then the taglines that almost make it sound like he's the victim. I'm not against him being on the cover generally but the way they did it is what's awful. Fine the nyt had it but it wasn't this powerful and in your face and offensive. RS should kill this cover - just like he killed so many. :(
Mike blanchette - 11 years ago
It's not merely that they showed his picture - it's the way they showed it - giant and boyband like and then the taglines that almost make it sound like he's the victim. I'm not against him being on the cover generally but the way they did it is what's awful. Fine the nyt had it but it wasn't this powerful and in your face and offensive. RS should kill this cover - just like he killed so many. :(
Sarah Khan - 11 years ago
This is hardly glorifying. I think it's important to read things like this and learn from them. We constantly say "why does this happen" "why do people/teenagers do this?" and when someone attempts to answer them, we go crazy and riot. Also, Would the picture be better if it was him frowning and ugly? Not really. We let our emotions get a hold of our rationality and that is not only scary but dangerous.
Ameer ... from Saudi Arabia - 11 years ago
Even thought he tryed to kill people and he was a terrorist, I don't agree. In my opinion, this is very offensive and ridiculous. Also, by this action against him, you'll give him a merit which is the show that he didn't desirve it. Finally, the justice must be applyed on him.
AGD - 11 years ago
The New York Times used the same picture and nobody cared. Also, nobody would care if TIME used it as well (as they would). I don't see the problem. They obviously don't celebrate his deeds.
I wonder if there was the same reaction when Charles Manson made the RS cover...
Vtmom - 11 years ago
It makes him look like a rock star and not the terrorist he is!
Vtmom - 11 years ago
It makes him look like a rock star and not the terrorist he is!
Mizzy - 11 years ago
It's truly heart breaking what both brothers did. My heart goes out to all the victims and families however I don't think it's offensive to have his picture on the cover of this magazine. Rolling Stones is not giving him a modeling contact, it's a story of a tragic event America will never forget.
Fred - 11 years ago
Talk to me after I read the article (online, for free).
Jose Alberto Gomez - 11 years ago
Amazing how many have tried, judged and convicted him already! So much for fair and impartial justice. Oh, that's right, this is America! So thoroughly disappointed and discouraged in where so many in this country have gone. It appears that Justice is no longer blind and fair and impartial!
Kimmycul8r - 11 years ago
Lets consider that the cover is NOT glorifying this crazed killer, it's making the story front and center. It's fair & balanced.Freedom of speech
Mark - 11 years ago
ROLLING STONE WANTED OUR ATTENTION AND THEY GOT IT NOW ...ITS OUR TURN DON'T PURCHASE ANY MAGS AND SELL your STOCK ...Boston Strong!!!!
Gini - 11 years ago
He murdered 4 people and maimed 100+ more. So yes I think a celebrity cover is actually incitement to others to try to emulate him. People will ride their bike of a roof just for a few YouTube hits, you really think they won't murder people for the cover of the Rolling Stone???
Officer Jack Houfferson - 11 years ago
Sweet! Blow a bunch of shit up, kill a bunch of innocent people, and make the cover of Rolling Stone mag! Hey potential future Terrorists, if you fulfill your mission, you could be the next cover model in RS!
Jeff Wilson - 11 years ago
No; Im not offended by it but I would rather not see the little creep that claims he is innocent.
Don - 11 years ago
..... "Rolling Stone earlier told USA TODAY that the outcry is reminiscent of another polarizing cover, more than 40 years ago, on cult leader and mass murderer Charles Manson. That cover, in June 1970, including a prison interview with Manson, became one of Rolling Stone's biggest selling issues and won a National Magazine award." .....
**biggest selling issues** -- there's your answer.
GMan - 11 years ago
The article is about how a seemingly normal teenage kid descended into a horrific terrorist. I think this actually says is not to judge a book by it's cover, no pun intended. This does not look like the face of a terrorist and that's the point of the article. It's not at all glorifying him or what he did. He's been on the front page of every newspaper in this country. How is this any different?
Gilda - 11 years ago
Why should society be reminded of these criminals and their acts of crime it's negative show a face of one who loves and cares for fellow human beings and does great things.
Sam - 11 years ago
It is an entertainment magazine, yes, so I don't see why he is on the cover or even in the magazine. However, what bothers me is that, because of media, people are found guilty before a proper trial and even if they are found innocent, people think they are guilty BECAUSE OF MEDIA. Innocent until proven guilty, people!
Nicole - 11 years ago
Absolutely, it's ridiculous. Rolling Stone is an entertainment magazine. What is entertaining about a terrorist? I could possibly see him being on the cover of a news magazine like Time, but Rolling Stone? It's sensationalizing him like a celebrity/entertainer & that's disgusting.
Absolutely Offensive! How did Rolling Stone even approve on this? it's pathetic because he's a godless psychopath
Lz - 11 years ago
That cover is very WRONG!! And VERY OFFENSIVE! I feel for the people injured by this disgusting excuse for a human. This is exactly what is wrong with our
country. Even though the media
has the freedom to print or say
what they feel is in the best
interest to sell their magazine or
get them ratings it is giving the
terrorist his time the spotlight.
How many will follow for their 15
minutes of fame?! Give the cover to those injured by this piece of garbage!
CEECEE - 11 years ago
I personally don't find it offensive but I understand why the American people might be uncomfortable with it. It seems like you're pulling the Band-Aid off of an open wound and reminding people of the pain that this terror suspect has caused. Rolling Stone magazine has always tackled the hard stuff and even though many were unhappy about it, once they got down to the message in the article, it seemed to make sense instead of just judging a book by it's cover. Now I HAVE to get the magazine to read it!
Kristin - 11 years ago
As a resident of Massachusetts I find this cover highly offensive and in no way should this man be glorified either by photo or story!
Mike Bradley - 11 years ago
CNN just wondering if you find child porn as offensive
Mike Bradley - 11 years ago
I find the question coming from CNN as offensive .
Your news outlet is just as bad.
Have some clue CNN !
RM - 11 years ago
Insensitivity runs rampant in the media. Now when something does happen to them, they cry foul. I hope they retract soon.
Kristina - 11 years ago
Yes
Kristina - 11 years ago
Yes
Kristina - 11 years ago
Yes
Kristina - 11 years ago
Yes
Christy Huntsman - 11 years ago
The photo on the cover is in very bad taste. Also, Rolling Stone magazine is very thoughtless of the victims, the city of Boston, and the rest of the country who still bear the scares of what this terrorist did. Shameful! The only way America has to show their displeasure is to boycott or otherwise discourage people from buying this magazine and frequenting their sponsors and advertisers. I will not buy this magazine and show my displeasure to the managers of any store that displays it. It is in very bad taste.
False flag is all I have to say.
Yeah...it's offensive, who at Rolling Stone thought it was a good idea to glamorize a killer, put him on a cover for the families of those who were murdered and crippled for life by him to be reminded all over again. How insensitive rolling stone, and did your sales spike? That was your real reason for putting him on the cover wasn't it....
Offensive? No. Informative? Yes! Read the cover "How a popular, promising student was failed by his family, fell into radical Islam and became a MONSTER". Seriously I don't think they are glorifying him or his actions. They are simply telling his story. This is what our life has become people. We are living in a scary world, where the unimaginable happens on a daily basis. Why not be informed of how it came to be? I do understand how some people may be offended by this cover story, and I feel and pray for those people. If I recall correctly, from years of schooling, it is Rolling Stone Magazine's First Amendment right to publish this article, and as a US Citizen I do not wish for any of us to be withheld that right.
Its not the fact that his picture is on the cover of the magazine, so much as it is the type of sultry looking picture that leads to confusion, perhaps if it had been a picture of him being taken away or arrested, it would have resonated better with the image we all have of a terrorist. Many years ago, Charles Manson was also portrayed on the cover of the RS magazine, i'm not sure if there was as much outrage then as there is now about this picture. At the end of the day, we want to read the article, find out why this happened but are clearly sensitive to how its being presented to us. It just feels that the information could have been delivered in a way that empathized more with the victims families and friends.
How is information offensive? What is offensive is choosing to remain ignorant. Looking at a cover photo as glorification rather than information is offensive. I haven't read the article, but I will now. It's so much better than having this important story hidden on page 63. Thank you Rolling Stone for having the courage to explain, front and center, why this tragedy happened. Your courage is a tribute to the courage our soldiers relied on when protecting our country, and the courage the survivors of this tragedy are facing day-by-day as they recover from this horrific incident.
I'm okay with Rolling Stone doing an article on the bomber because we are all curious what would drive someone to such a heinous act. I think most people, including myself, are offended by him being glorified by having him on the cover.
I think the boy is a cute killer. Sometimes I wish I had the same intestinal fortitude.
Can't wait to read this controversial article. 'Never judge a book by its cover.'
Can't wait to read this controversial article. 'Never judge a book by its cover.'
They have no shame. My son fought to keep us free from terrorists. Where is the tribute to them? Oh that's right-not pc enough for them
I don't agree with the cover of RS. The magazine itself is in really bad shape and I am surprise it is still around. This was a way to get attention and to sell issues. It is a shame. Also a lot of the comments are a bout him being glorified. Just remember he will probably never see daylight again and I am sure he has no idea about the RS cover. Lets not give him our time by discussing it. Let justice prevail.
Seriously, the world is getting more disturbing by the day… Very sad commentary on our society. Guilty as sin ! I feel bad for the victims ! I wish the media would stop glamorizing these type of people. Outrageous and sad...
What scares me the most if other screw heads out there got the message wrong and saw terrorism as a quick way to fame. The article itself also somewhat alluded to the bomber as a victim. It's just wrong.
What scares me the most if other screw heads out there got the message wrong and saw terrorism as a quick way to fame. The article itself also somewhat alluded to the bomber as a victim. It's just wrong.
What scares me the most if other screw heads out there got the message wrong and saw terrorism as a quick way to fame. The article itself also somewhat alluded to the bomber as a victim. It's just wrong.
What scares me the most if other screw heads out there got the message wrong and saw terrorism as a quick way to fame. The article itself also somewhat alluded to the bomber as a victim. It's just wrong.
This MF'er doesn't deserve a cover of ANY thing. It's like you're giving him the attention he wanted to begin with.
It's not merely that they showed his picture - it's the way they showed it - giant and boyband like and then the taglines that almost make it sound like he's the victim. I'm not against him being on the cover generally but the way they did it is what's awful. Fine the nyt had it but it wasn't this powerful and in your face and offensive. RS should kill this cover - just like he killed so many. :(
It's not merely that they showed his picture - it's the way they showed it - giant and boyband like and then the taglines that almost make it sound like he's the victim. I'm not against him being on the cover generally but the way they did it is what's awful. Fine the nyt had it but it wasn't this powerful and in your face and offensive. RS should kill this cover - just like he killed so many. :(
This is hardly glorifying. I think it's important to read things like this and learn from them. We constantly say "why does this happen" "why do people/teenagers do this?" and when someone attempts to answer them, we go crazy and riot. Also, Would the picture be better if it was him frowning and ugly? Not really. We let our emotions get a hold of our rationality and that is not only scary but dangerous.
Even thought he tryed to kill people and he was a terrorist, I don't agree. In my opinion, this is very offensive and ridiculous. Also, by this action against him, you'll give him a merit which is the show that he didn't desirve it. Finally, the justice must be applyed on him.
The New York Times used the same picture and nobody cared. Also, nobody would care if TIME used it as well (as they would). I don't see the problem. They obviously don't celebrate his deeds.
I wonder if there was the same reaction when Charles Manson made the RS cover...
It makes him look like a rock star and not the terrorist he is!
It makes him look like a rock star and not the terrorist he is!
It's truly heart breaking what both brothers did. My heart goes out to all the victims and families however I don't think it's offensive to have his picture on the cover of this magazine. Rolling Stones is not giving him a modeling contact, it's a story of a tragic event America will never forget.
Talk to me after I read the article (online, for free).
Amazing how many have tried, judged and convicted him already! So much for fair and impartial justice. Oh, that's right, this is America! So thoroughly disappointed and discouraged in where so many in this country have gone. It appears that Justice is no longer blind and fair and impartial!
Lets consider that the cover is NOT glorifying this crazed killer, it's making the story front and center. It's fair & balanced.Freedom of speech
ROLLING STONE WANTED OUR ATTENTION AND THEY GOT IT NOW ...ITS OUR TURN DON'T PURCHASE ANY MAGS AND SELL your STOCK ...Boston Strong!!!!
He murdered 4 people and maimed 100+ more. So yes I think a celebrity cover is actually incitement to others to try to emulate him. People will ride their bike of a roof just for a few YouTube hits, you really think they won't murder people for the cover of the Rolling Stone???
Sweet! Blow a bunch of shit up, kill a bunch of innocent people, and make the cover of Rolling Stone mag! Hey potential future Terrorists, if you fulfill your mission, you could be the next cover model in RS!
No; Im not offended by it but I would rather not see the little creep that claims he is innocent.
..... "Rolling Stone earlier told USA TODAY that the outcry is reminiscent of another polarizing cover, more than 40 years ago, on cult leader and mass murderer Charles Manson. That cover, in June 1970, including a prison interview with Manson, became one of Rolling Stone's biggest selling issues and won a National Magazine award." .....
**biggest selling issues** -- there's your answer.
The article is about how a seemingly normal teenage kid descended into a horrific terrorist. I think this actually says is not to judge a book by it's cover, no pun intended. This does not look like the face of a terrorist and that's the point of the article. It's not at all glorifying him or what he did. He's been on the front page of every newspaper in this country. How is this any different?
Why should society be reminded of these criminals and their acts of crime it's negative show a face of one who loves and cares for fellow human beings and does great things.
It is an entertainment magazine, yes, so I don't see why he is on the cover or even in the magazine. However, what bothers me is that, because of media, people are found guilty before a proper trial and even if they are found innocent, people think they are guilty BECAUSE OF MEDIA. Innocent until proven guilty, people!
Absolutely, it's ridiculous. Rolling Stone is an entertainment magazine. What is entertaining about a terrorist? I could possibly see him being on the cover of a news magazine like Time, but Rolling Stone? It's sensationalizing him like a celebrity/entertainer & that's disgusting.
Absolutely Offensive! How did Rolling Stone even approve on this? it's pathetic because he's a godless psychopath
That cover is very WRONG!! And VERY OFFENSIVE! I feel for the people injured by this disgusting excuse for a human. This is exactly what is wrong with our
country. Even though the media
has the freedom to print or say
what they feel is in the best
interest to sell their magazine or
get them ratings it is giving the
terrorist his time the spotlight.
How many will follow for their 15
minutes of fame?! Give the cover to those injured by this piece of garbage!
I personally don't find it offensive but I understand why the American people might be uncomfortable with it. It seems like you're pulling the Band-Aid off of an open wound and reminding people of the pain that this terror suspect has caused. Rolling Stone magazine has always tackled the hard stuff and even though many were unhappy about it, once they got down to the message in the article, it seemed to make sense instead of just judging a book by it's cover. Now I HAVE to get the magazine to read it!
As a resident of Massachusetts I find this cover highly offensive and in no way should this man be glorified either by photo or story!
CNN just wondering if you find child porn as offensive
I find the question coming from CNN as offensive .
Your news outlet is just as bad.
Have some clue CNN !
Insensitivity runs rampant in the media. Now when something does happen to them, they cry foul. I hope they retract soon.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
The photo on the cover is in very bad taste. Also, Rolling Stone magazine is very thoughtless of the victims, the city of Boston, and the rest of the country who still bear the scares of what this terrorist did. Shameful! The only way America has to show their displeasure is to boycott or otherwise discourage people from buying this magazine and frequenting their sponsors and advertisers. I will not buy this magazine and show my displeasure to the managers of any store that displays it. It is in very bad taste.
it's way more than offensive it's outrageous, infuriating, it was nauseating to see it
Typical lemming group mentality.
He's a terrorist end of story!
Bad
FREE JAHAR
I don't find it offensive, but I can understand completely why it would be offensive to the people of Boston.
Ridiculous and offensive!