Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Made the Cover of Rolling Stone
Rolling Stone naturally decided to make a profile of Boston bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev the cover story of their next issue, but their choice of cover photo has more than few people baffled and upset. The layout, which is being described as "shocking" and "offensive," resembles any number of rock star images that have graced the magazine over the years... and that's exactly the problem. Many people feel that the photo the editors chose makes Tsarnaev look like a smoldering teen heartthrob and not the accused murderer and terrorist that he is.
RELATED: Rush Limbaugh Thinks 'Lovable' Photos of Tsarnaev & Trayvon Are a Conspiracy
A few people have pointed out that the magazine has featured plenty of villains and criminals on its cover in the past, including Charles Manson in 1970. And the magazine (like other publications) only has a few photos of the man to choose from, which is why we've actually seen this image in several other places before, including The New York Times (and this website.) But the combination of Tsarnaev's casual, glamorous appearance with the famously "cool" magazine's attitude just isn't sitting well with most people.
RELATED: Since When Is Anyone Being Nice About the (Alleged) Boston Bombers?
The online reaction was almost universally against the choice, with some vowing to never buy Rolling Stone again.
At least Rolling Stone went w/ "THE BOMBER" over their first choice: "Boston's Bad Boy: Sexy, Vulnerable, Dangerous." http://t.co/4bqAtrpANg
— Adam Graham (@grahamorama) July 16, 2013
Nice. Rolling Stone front page. Something for future nutjobs to aspire to. http://t.co/JMg5Pe1mve (via @heawood)
— Shaun Usher (@LettersOfNote) July 17, 2013
At Rolling Stone: "Let's use Zimmerman next!" "Does Dylan have a new album dropping?" "Not Bob, George!" <eye gouge> <wrench to nose>
— Patton Oswalt (@pattonoswalt) July 17, 2013
Wonder how many people see the Boston bomber on the cover of “Rolling Stone” and think it’s a member of a boy band or star of a CW show?
— Alan Spencer (@MrAlanSpencer) July 17, 2013
At Rolling Stone: "Let's use Zimmerman next!" "Does Dylan have a new album dropping?" "Not Bob, George!" <eye gouge> <wrench to nose>
— Patton Oswalt (@pattonoswalt) July 17, 2013
Last wk I wrote about Tiger Beat Terrorist Syndrome. This wk, Rolling Stone editor joins the Ja-harem. http://t.co/wlcJSdI4us
— Michelle Malkin (@michellemalkin) July 16, 2013
At least Rolling Stone didn't go with this Dzhokhar Tsarnaev cover concept… pic.twitter.com/BvGTktYn6S
— Dave Gilson (@daudig) July 17, 2013
Last wk I wrote about Tiger Beat Terrorist Syndrome. This wk, Rolling Stone editor joins the Ja-harem. http://t.co/wlcJSdI4us
RELATED: WikiLeaks Is Running Out of Media Friends
— Michelle Malkin (@michellemalkin) July 16, 2013
RELATED: The Continued Politicization of the Trayvon Martin Case
Ironically, even the small community of "Free Dzhokhar" zealots, who are unabashed fans of Tsarnaev (and his looks) are against the cover too, believing the story and the use of the word "monster" in the headline will unfairly prejudice people against him.
#BoycottRollingStone calling Djahar a monster and stirring the pot even more shame on you! Innocent until PROVEN guilty @RollingStone
— ℐɛnsɛn Ƥɑɗɑℓɛcĸɪ❤ (@Jahars_Tsarnaev) July 17, 2013
Of course, what is getting lost in the outrage is the substance of the actual story, written by contributing editor Janet Reitman, which has not been posted online. It promises an in-depth look at Tsarnaev's personal history and a chronicle of his toward radical Islam and terrorism, but may be overshadowed by this cover controversy. The article may be sympathetic or gut-wrenching or grippingly informative, but it's likely that most of the people who see the cover will never read it, and even fewer people will get to discuss it seriously.
