My daughter and her boyfriend are on lock down. She was scheduled to fly out to Vegas today for a bachelorette party. Still don't know if she'll be able to go. Luckily her boyfriend is a chef so she will be able to enjoy some nice meals while they are stuck inside. Living on the other coast leaves me shaking.

DaffyKD

My parents and the majority of my paternal extended family live in one of the locked-down suburbs. Thank goodness for email and FB messages letting us know everyone is safe. Even happier that marathon daughter is in DC this weekend....

Can we get updates on your families? Were they in the same neighborhood?

Pictures from the day's events, including the celebration after suspect #2 was captured alive:

http://news.yahoo.com/photos/suspect.../?format=embed

Interesting.. apparently the older brother was interviewed by the FBI in 2011 at the request of Russia..

http://news.yahoo.com/police-descend...ml?.tsrc=attmp

I don't have any friends/family in Watertown but quite a few live in the adjacent suburbs of Newton, Brookline, and Belmont. Everyone is fine. My oldest went back to Boston today as the school systems return from April Vacation on Monday.

Not quite sure where to post this, but an Arizona Delta Gamma alumna and her husband were badly injured in the bombing; each lost the lower part of the left leg. Wishing them a speedy recovery.

"Are the Boston bombers just douchebags?"

Definitely.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobile...b_3156038.html

One of my co-teachers lives 2 houses away from "the boat". Scary. I was in Aruba. I was completely content to stay there if the area remained on lockdown.

One of my cousin's friends could see the bombers' house from his living room window. How scary to know that you've been living next door to terrorists.

I'm sure most of you have heard about the latest issue of Rolling Stone and the controversy regarding the cover...

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013...the-issue?lite

What do you think, GCers? Is this art and/or a good way to portray how a seemingly "normal" kid turned bad? .. or is it offensive and a slap in the face to those who were directly affected by the bombings?

I personally find it in very poor taste.

I think it was a very poor decision on Rolling Stone's part. It has long been established that mass shooters, killers, etc. may be motivated by the prospect of infamy and notoriety. While I don't think that was what motivated the Tsarnaev brothers, another deranged person might see the magazine and think, "Hey, I can blow up a school/gun down a shopping mall and be on the cover of Rolling Stone too!" If they just had to cover the story, they could have used a less flattering picture (like his mugshot) or better yet a picture of victims. Not to mention the attacks were three months ago- do the people of Boston constantly have to be reminded of what they endured?

I think Rolling Stone will come to regret this choice of cover, as it has already alienated many readers and is bound to cause financial loss for the magazine.

I find it in very bad taste as well. The cover makes the bomber look like a cool, bad boy, rock and roll star. Newsflash: he isn't any of those things. CaseyBat took the words right out of my mouth.

As someone in the advertising industry, I've been very curious about their decision to run that cover from this aspect.

Clearly, this decision was made to get people talking about Rolling Stone. I remember that shortly before I left my old job, I happened to take a meeting with Rolling Stone—my client had previously run in them but we had not ran with them in some time (I don’t know what the old Director on my account was thinking…it was on a paint brand, why would he recommend Rolling Stone?? But I digress…) I don’t know why it sticks out in my memory, because a lot of my meetings with magazine are a blur, but I remember that the first thing he asked me was “When you think of Rolling Stone, what do you think of?” and I said “Music and entertainment”. He went on to say that yes, while that is the foundation of the magazine, they do also cover news, world and political issues, which is something that people forget and something they’re always striving to get their audience to think of when they think of the magazine. I immediately thought of this conversation when I saw the cover.

What I’m interested to know is if advertisers were notified of the cover beforehand. I’m trying to think back to know if there was ever a time where I was specifically notified about who is on the cover if there was not a specific reason I would need to know. (You do find out in some cases if a magazine thinks it might help them sell an ad; when I worked on an retail account, one of the celebrities who had a clothing line at the store was featured on the cover a magazine so they were sure to let us know in hopes that they would get some business as a result). But it doesn’t always happen. I can imagine that they are going to take a hit financially, not from a subscription/sales standpoint but from advertising sales. Every brand I ever worked on has been EXTREMELY sensitive to the environment they’re being placed in. If some advertisers didn’t know what the cover was going to be, I’m sure they were LIVID once they found out. I can imagine that there are quite a few ads being canceled/media planners are removing the magazine from recommendations. I’m just thinking if that happened to my last client…her head would have exploded.

Then again, most of the types of advertisers that run with Rolling Stone tend to know what they’re getting into, but still.

Sorry this is not really an emotional perspective…just some thoughts I had based on my experience.