Rolling Stone Cover? This is why it is wrong....warning Graphic Photo.

[MADem]

130. RS was glamorizing him.

There are plenty of pictures of him available that don't have that soft light, expensive shirt, carefully posed, "look into my eyes" vibe.

They knew what they wanted, and they got it.

He doesn't look at all "normal" in that picture--he probably took a half dozen until he got just the right facial expression, as the kids do these days.

He looks FAMOUS-- like a relaxed rock star; that was surely the look he was going for, and that was the photograph that RS chose...for the very REASON that he looks like a rock star.

I don't think Adam Lanza or the "Aurora Nut" look like killers, either--they look Rather Mentally Ill, frankly. You can walk around any mall in USA and see people with "that look" (maybe without the orange hair) being led around by their tired, older mothers, still raising an adult living in their basement, looking like they could use a break, often as not.

Here's a "normal" kid in a "normal" picture:




Here's another pic of a "normal" kid:



Here's a normal kid with his normal friends:



But none of those would do, now, would they? Why? Because Rolling Stone puts Rock Stars on their cover.