Week 3: EOC - Rolling Stone

With Every article comes controversy; however not every article is publically broadcasted that way. But then again not every new companies post a picture of a terrorist bomber. Rolling stone magazine published a magazine cover where one of the Boston bombers was front and center in a total normal picture. This raised a lot confusion, anger, and rath among readers. I think that the cover did exactly its purpose, it got people to feel something, it got people talking, and it got people to read. When reading the article on http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/explaining-the-rolling-stone-cover-by-a-boston-native-20130719#ixzz2aGBqK81c I saw mainly too rational points that the article brought up and they both are in reference to the picture. Just the picture. Earlier that year the New York Times posted the same picture and this is what the article had to say “But there was no backlash against the Times, because everyone knows the Times is a news organization. Not everyone knows that about Rolling Stone. So that's your entire controversy right there” and “This brings us to point No. 2, the idea that the cover photo showed Tsarnaev to be too nice-looking, too much like a sweet little boy.” These were the big two topics that created the most controversy. Written in the article by rolling stone the reporter learned a little about the bombers life. Said by his friends, he was totally normal, he liked girls, played soccer, and smoked a lot of weed. But even his friends didn’t know his family, had never been to his house, there was something always a little off about him.