Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: (re: Rolling Stone bans) Is there no limit to our national outrage-addiction? [View all]gvstn
(2,805 posts)114. Oh and this quote from Slate
Yes, the editors were surely aware that Tsarnaev has attracted a bizarre fan base of young women professing their crushes and asserting his innocence. But its ridiculous to assume that the magazine was playing off his strange cult followingan assumption we would never make for Time or the New York Times.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2013/07/17/boston_bomber_rolling_stone_cover_with_dzokhar_tsarnaev_is_good_journalism.html
Perhaps, I am being ridiculous but after reading the article, I think they were in part playing of the strange cult following. Read the whole article, it never goes too far afield of reminding you of how well liked he was, almost like the author didn't want to alienate any particular subset of young readers.
The last paragraph of the story:
One anecdote that wasn't in the article but that has been quietly making its way around town, via one of his former nurses, is that Jahar cried for two days straight after he woke up in the hospital. No one in the group has heard this yet, and when I mention it, Alyssa gives an anguished sigh of relief. "That's good to know," she says.
"I can definitely see him doing that," says Sam, gratefully. "I hope he's crying. I'd definitely hope . . ."
"I hope he'd wake up and go, 'What the fuck did I do the last 48 hours?' " says Jackson, who decides, along with the others, that this, the crying detail, sounds like Jahar.
But, then again, no one knows what he was crying about.
"I can definitely see him doing that," says Sam, gratefully. "I hope he's crying. I'd definitely hope . . ."
"I hope he'd wake up and go, 'What the fuck did I do the last 48 hours?' " says Jackson, who decides, along with the others, that this, the crying detail, sounds like Jahar.
But, then again, no one knows what he was crying about.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
152 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
(re: Rolling Stone bans) Is there no limit to our national outrage-addiction? [View all]
cthulu2016
Jul 2013
OP
Agree, my take on the picture too. Plus, if the world can discuss Trayvon's hoodie and whether
txwhitedove
Jul 2013
#43
I remember that some refused to sell Rolling Stone when Elton John came out.
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2013
#93
If he had pimples, bad teeth and crossed eyes...he wouldn't even make the inside pages. nt
MADem
Jul 2013
#53
Gee, he's not in a reposed, relaxed, softly lit, "staring directly into the camera, dreamy-eyed"
MADem
Jul 2013
#121
Thanks for that. I just read that they wanted to depict a sheep in wolf's clothing effect.
graywarrior
Jul 2013
#70
But there was no outrage when the same photo was on the front page of the New York Times?
Nye Bevan
Jul 2013
#38
I've discussed this with friends from Boston who are sincerely upset, but I don't see it myself
onenote
Jul 2013
#21
I don't see how a headline that describes someone as "Fell into Radical Islam and became a Monster"
Douglas Carpenter
Jul 2013
#22
I don't really care. I'm just saying that for people who were traumatized by this guy's actions,
geek tragedy
Jul 2013
#32
That's a convenient change of mounts. You called the photo 'soft porn' upthread.
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2013
#94
Cake and Eat It Too arguments are the defining tactic of those in the wrong...
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2013
#109
A free and open press matters to me. This bothers you. So you pick the fight.
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2013
#139
a lot of folks are saying it's because it's rolling stone. had it been a 'news' magazine
ejpoeta
Jul 2013
#80
Look who you're naming--Manson, Nixon, Police With Batons--you're going back over a generation.
MADem
Jul 2013
#124
Agree -totally lame and pretty Poison boys= nothing to do with what the song is about IMO
lunasun
Jul 2013
#84
Yes, the publisher should pose in front of his own Mission Accomplished banner
BeyondGeography
Jul 2013
#101
It's fauxrage. If Nat'l Review had put him on their cover, these same people would be silent.
reformist2
Jul 2013
#59
excellent article. It's easy for a terrorist to grow at home. lota Mutts lookin' for Jeffs to follow
Sunlei
Jul 2013
#61
Would people be so outraged if the picture had been of a "menacing" black teenager?
Skwmom
Jul 2013
#67
Larry's 'showbiz' work got some harsh reviews from RS so he's wicked bittah
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2013
#113
So you at least admit that Boston Globe has done 'essetially the same story'
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2013
#107
You admit both stories are essentially the same, but you cann't say why one is
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2013
#119
Can you compare this piece in the Boston Globe to Rolling Stone and explain
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2013
#83
Of course you don't have to explain but if you are uable to explain why you are
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2013
#92
Well, when cover after cover, year after year, is professionally posed and shot pictures of
MADem
Jul 2013
#120
So your take is that if we ignore all the precedents and simply claim they don't
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2013
#132
Gee, put HIM on the cover--we've got a few months yet before he's past his sell-by date!
MADem
Jul 2013
#131
Glorified? By calling him a monster, an extemist and a bomber? Where's the glory?
Bluenorthwest
Jul 2013
#138