Boston Bomber on cover of Rolling Stone magazine
- 1Jul 17, '13 by BCgradnurse GuideDzokhar Tsarnaev, currently under arrest for the Boston Marathon bombings, is the cover photo and lead article in the latest issue of Rolling Stone. Reaction to this has been overwhelmingly negative. Many people feel this coverage serves to glorify him and keep him in the public eye. Others feel he is an interesting study in psychology and want to read the author's speculation on why this young man allegedly performed this horrible act of domestic terrorism. As a lifelong Bostonian, I just want him to be thrown in a hole somewhere, never to be heard from again.
What do you think about the magazine's decision to run this controversial piece?
(I tried to post a link to the article, but couldn't. You can Google it, or check Facebook, as it's all over the place there). My apologies.
- 0Jul 17, '13 by herring_RN GuideHe is in custody. That is enough for me. if I thought he could be found not guilty and let go i would be VERY upset. That is niot the case.
I'm glad professionals and interested people are discussing why he did what he did. If it can help prevent violence or identify those who are likely to hurt or kill people that is good.
- 3Jul 17, '13 by KelRN215, BSN, RNHere is the link: Dzhokhar Tsarnaev: Jahar's World | Culture News | Rolling Stone
The story is fine, the way he's glorified on the cover is not. As a fellow lifelong Bostonian, I want him to spend the next 60 years rotting in jail and then eternity rotting in Hell.
Interestingly, CVS and Tedeschi's, both with strong roots in New England, have announced that they will not carry this issue:
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/b...-cover-stores/Last edit by KelRN215 on Jul 17, '13
- 1Jul 17, '13 by mama.RNWell, I live not far from Boston, and I still can't believe that monsters like those two were in my midst, but I am sure there are unfortunately more to follow them. I am all for talking about what happened and trying to prevent another set of Tsarnaev brothers from killing and maiming more innocents. It's just that I know without a doubt that that waste of my oxygen is sitting in his cell, smiling right now, saying to himself, "Damn Son, I made the cover of Rolling Stone." That's what ****** me off. They could have done the story without making him look like a rock star on the cover. The only photo of him I want to see is the one of him sitting on a pressure cooker bomb as it goes off. That would've made a good cover.Last edit by mama.RN on Jul 17, '13 : Reason: spelling error
- 0Jul 17, '13 by NewbyLPN, LPNHonestly, I'm not comfortable seeing that cover. Yes, they're definitely studying them, but to see those faces again just reminds me of the devastating event they had done in this country. Many ppl lost their loved ones, died and injured because of those two sick guys. I think I'm content enough to know that the other one in under custody and the other one is dead. They both deserve everything that's been going on with them. I just think that the whole front cover is inappropriate and like a "slap on your face!" sort of act in my opinion.
- 5Jul 17, '13 by azhiker96There was no reason to put his picture on the cover. They could have run the article without putting his smiling face on the news stands. They should have posted a picture of one of the survivors with a sub title that there was an article inside about the people responsible. I would have used a current picture of a survivor showing how great they look and have persevered in spite of the event.
- 0Jul 17, '13 by NewbyLPN, LPNQuote from azhiker96Ya! I definitely agree with you! It's ridiculous that these ppl would put that as a cover! I think we all know who were the bombers, and for sure not interested in seeeing their faces again. That cover is like an insultThere was no reason to put his picture on the cover. They could have run the article without putting his smiling face on the news stands. They should have posted a picture of one of the survivors with a sub title that there was an article inside about the people responsible. I would have used a current picture of a survivor showing how great they look and have persevered in spite of the event.
- 2Jul 18, '13 by nursel56 GuideAgree with you all. I think opinion is about 99 to 1 against. What really gets to me is the reaction of the people of Boston and environs. I don't think any of us, including "edgy" publishers can know how deep that trauma cuts. It's bad enough if they misjudged the outrage that would ensue, but I can't help but suspect they did know and knew it would put their name front and center.
Just thought I'd post this link to letter to Rolling Stone from Boston Mayor Tom Menino.
Mayor Menino Pens Letter to Rolling Stone PublisherLast edit by nursel56 on Jul 18, '13 : Reason: add link
- 6Jul 18, '13 by Esme12, BSN, RN Senior ModeratorWhile Rolling Stone has placed non "rock star" on the cover before......I think glorifying this young man will encourage others to be "on the cover of the rolling stone".
I think it is WAY too soon and to make him look like a rock star disgusts me. Rolling stone KNEW full well what they were doing for one of their biggest selling issues was when Charles Manson was on the cover in 1970. Manson is a crazy serial killer. This murderer is a calculated cold blooded terrorist who planned and sought out innocent people and intends to be a martyr.
I think they (Rolling Stone) should donate ALL proceeds from the magazine selling to the victims families.