Rolling stones
The edgy stylish magazine The Rolling Stones made a perplexing decision on their august cover issue. Although the august issue made a 145 percent increase on last year’s issue, it was beneficial for the magazine. Why make the cover of a person who was on trial for bombing in Boston? The Rolling stones magazine has done this before in the 1970’s they had a cover of a Charles Mason, should we not be surprised that they did something like this again. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on the cover of the rolling stone magazine. The public was definitely not happy with what The Rolling Stones did, many people had a lot to say about this situation. Everyone was really surprised how the magazine made his photo more appealing than the original photo. The professor Kathleen Hall Jamieson from the University of Pennsylvania said "I can't think of another instance in which one has glamorized the image of an alleged terrorist. This is the image of a rock star. This is the image of someone who is admired, of someone who has a fan base, of someone we are critiquing as art,” The professor makes a very good point there are no other pictures where a terrorist is glamorized. The rolling stones had no comment saying “Rolling Stone did not address whether the photo was edited or filtered in any way in a brief statement offering condolences to bombing survivors and the loved ones of the dead.” The photo cause so much controversy many people thought that the magazine was glorifying the bomber. Even though on the cover at the bottom of his picture it does say bomber in a big nice bold lettering it still seemed as though he was a celebrity. My guess is that the some of the public was offended by The Rolling Stones.
The edgy stylish magazine The Rolling Stones made a perplexing decision on their august cover issue. Although the august issue made a 145 percent increase on last year’s issue, it was beneficial for the magazine. Why make the cover of a person who was on trial for bombing in Boston? The Rolling stones magazine has done this before in the 1970’s they had a cover of a Charles Mason, should we not be surprised that they did something like this again. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on the cover of the rolling stone magazine. The public was definitely not happy with what The Rolling Stones did, many people had a lot to say about this situation. Everyone was really surprised how the magazine made his photo more appealing than the original photo. The professor Kathleen Hall Jamieson from the University of Pennsylvania said "I can't think of another instance in which one has glamorized the image of an alleged terrorist. This is the image of a rock star. This is the image of someone who is admired, of someone who has a fan base, of someone we are critiquing as art,” The professor makes a very good point there are no other pictures where a terrorist is glamorized. The rolling stones had no comment saying “Rolling Stone did not address whether the photo was edited or filtered in any way in a brief statement offering condolences to bombing survivors and the loved ones of the dead.” The photo cause so much controversy many people thought that the magazine was glorifying the bomber. Even though on the cover at the bottom of his picture it does say bomber in a big nice bold lettering it still seemed as though he was a celebrity. My guess is that the some of the public was offended by The Rolling Stones.
No comments:
Post a Comment