Magazine covers frequently stir up controversy. Who can forget the LeBron James and Gisele Bundchen’s Vogue cover that was considered to be a racist portrayal of “King Kong”. Rolling Stone is no stranger to controversial covers.
In 1970, the magazine featured Charles Manson on the cover in what it called a “special report”. For the August issue, the magazine features a story and photo of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, “The Boston Bomber” and is titled: “The Bomber: How a popular, promising student was failed by his family, fell into radical Islam and became a monster.”
The hashtag #BoycottRollingStone has been trending on Twitter and some retail stores are refusing to sell the issue.
While I respect their right to publish the story, I believe that honoring any victim of the Bombing with their cover would have been more tasteful. By featuring Tsarnaev on the cover, Rolling Stone glamorizes what he and his brother did and elevates him to celebrity status. From my understanding the content of the article is an example of really great journalism, but their approach to reporting is questionable.
Rolling Stone had the following comment:
“Our hearts go out to the victims of the Boston Marathon bombing, and our thoughts are always with them and their families. The cover story we are publishing this week falls within the traditions of journalism and Rolling Stone’s long-standing commitment to serious and thoughtful coverage of the most important political and cultural issues of our day.”
I would love to hear your thoughts on the topic. Is Rolling Stone out of line? Are they glorifying terrorism?
