|
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.
|
Threaded Mode
