Bomber as rock star? Rolling Stone cover outrage

[Vehicle]

do you think they'd have put the bomber on the front cover if he was overweight , ugly and about 60 years old?

Overweight, ugly and about 60 is a good thing.

 

[coltrane2]

Overweight, ugly and about 60 is a good thing.

It is indeed. Could not agree more. But that's not what sells cover.

 

[Vehicle]

It is indeed. Could not agree more. But that's not what sells cover.

oh, I don't know. I don't subscribe, but if I were in an airport and saw this on the cover of a magazine, I might buy it, just to see what Neil's been up to.

I know for a fact I wouldn't buy it if that bomber kid was on the cover.

 

[The Wanderer]

oh, I don't know. I don't subscribe, but if I were in an airport and saw this on the cover of a magazine, I might buy it, just to see what Neil's been up to.

I know for a fact I wouldn't buy it if that bomber kid was on the cover.

Agreed

 

[AboutAGirl]

I remember this one from the mid-00s.

 

[Music Wench]

I was outraged at first, but when I thought about it for a while... Rolling Stone is as much a news/political magazine as it is a music magazine. I don't think it should be, but unfortunately it is. A great many of their covers are political. I wouldn't have a problem with someone like this on the cover of Newsweek or Time, so I can't say there's a problem on Rolling Stone either.

I'm with you on this one. People hear Rolling Stone and they think automatically it's only about music when in reality it's not. They've always been political. And the story is kind of a warning. Just because they look cute and could be the boy next door doesn't mean they're not monsters behind that mask.

But having said that, I understand why people would be outraged. I think it came out a little too soon.