Why the rolling stone cover is causing such reaction

[TheFlyingCamera]

I haven't read it yet. But I did buy it, and I managed to buy a copy at CVS, which is one of the vendors who have banned its sale. I think I got lucky - I was buying it through the self-checkout, and the machine kept saying something to the effect of "sale prohibited - do not sell this item". The assistant came over and over-rode the machine and hand-entered it. I find that attitude (the CVS management attitude) to be the greater sin than putting a humanizing photo on the cover. I think it was absolutely the right thing to do - it is all too easy to put a picture out that demonizes him and makes him look like the Newman portrait of Krupp. But reminding everyone that there but for the grace of god goes your child, your neighbor, your friend, well... that raises a lot of very uncomfortable questions about American society and identity at a time when a lot of people are afraid the new American identity doesn't have room for them anymore. I also saw the photos of the Boston Police takedown of Tsarnayev, and while absolutely newsworthy, I would have found the pictures of him bloodied wearing a torn shirt to be more offensive.

 

[eddie]

You nailed it, Scott. It amazes me that people, who haven't even read the article, are so quick to condemn the magazine.

s-a: Rolling Stone has been publishing political articles for decades. This is nothing new, for them. Did you read it?

 

[markbarendt]

I've been in the darkroom all day.

Being in the darkroom is good.

Hope you got something good.

 

[Tom1956]

Being in the darkroom is good.

Hope you got something good.

No that's my kind of topic.

 

[pstake]

I haven't read it yet. But I did buy it, and I managed to buy a copy at CVS, which is one of the vendors who have banned its sale. I think I got lucky - I was buying it through the self-checkout, and the machine kept saying something to the effect of "sale prohibited - do not sell this item". The assistant came over and over-rode the machine and hand-entered it. I find that attitude (the CVS management attitude) to be the greater sin than putting a humanizing photo on the cover. I think it was absolutely the right thing to do - it is all too easy to put a picture out that demonizes him and makes him look like the Newman portrait of Krupp. But reminding everyone that there but for the grace of god goes your child, your neighbor, your friend, well... that raises a lot of very uncomfortable questions about American society and identity at a time when a lot of people are afraid the new American identity doesn't have room for them anymore. I also saw the photos of the Boston Police takedown of Tsarnayev, and while absolutely newsworthy, I would have found the pictures of him bloodied wearing a torn shirt to be more offensive.

If you ever make it to Nebraska, I'll buy you a pint (maybe two if you bring your Rolleiflex).

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

If you ever make it to Nebraska, I'll buy you a pint (maybe two if you bring your Rolleiflex).

I drove through once on my way to California. I need to make it back, if for nothing else than to stop and see the Pioneer Bridge, and watch the Sandhill Crane migration. And to photograph some amazing sunsets. Whodathunk flat land would be good for something other than farming?

 

[pstake]

I drove through once on my way to California. I need to make it back, if for nothing else than to stop and see the Pioneer Bridge, and watch the Sandhill Crane migration. And to photograph some amazing sunsets. Whodathunk flat land would be good for something other than farming?

Don't forget about Carhenge, http://www.carhenge.com, for the discerning traveler who doesn't want to deal with crowds at the real thing.

 

[Vaughn]

...
The photo and the article are meant to make a point. It calls into question the assumptions we make about those around us, it questions our "everyday" biases and prejudices.

It asks something very hard for most people, to understand that "somebody like me" could do something truly heinous.

I fully support RS's choice to publish this. IMO we, America, need to quit profiling people by there looks, their clothes, their job, their status...

Close enough to how I feel and think about this, so thanks for saving me the effort to type it all out.

Vaughn

 

[MartinCrabtree]

The prevailing reaction is "how dare you think differently than I do!!??" This blind "patriotism" is a result of public schools teaching children to listen to other people instead of researching and forming an informed opinion. Especially when it comes to volatile subjects.

Doesn't anyone wonder what made a couple of kids,yes kids do what those two did?

 

[semi-ambivalent]

Being in the darkroom is good.

Hope you got something good.

Meh. The neg I had hopes for is a nothing when it's on paper, but there might be some throw-aways that, surprise, look nice. It's been frustrating so I'm off to mow the grass, now that it's hot enough to make it miserable.

s-a

 

[omaha]

The prevailing reaction is "how dare you think differently than I do!!??" This blind "patriotism" is a result of public schools teaching children to listen to other people instead of researching and forming an informed opinion. Especially when it comes to volatile subjects.

Doesn't anyone wonder what made a couple of kids,yes kids do what those two did?

I had an incident the other day that was deeply troubling.

I have a daughter who is going to be a sophomore in high school this coming year. She is interested in journalism and photography (yes, that's my girl!).

I suggested to her that she could start an "underground" blog where they tell stories about things happening at her school. Get a few other students together, publish at least one story a day, dig some dirt, have some fun.

She said she would get suspended for sure.

??????

We talked about it, and I won't give you all the details, but the short version is that a student a few years ago opened a Twitter account and said a bunch of unflattering things about their principal, and that student got in trouble.

I'm amazed that we put up with this. When I was in school, the idea of investigative journalism and holding authority figures accountable was very much what we aspired to. Maybe that's because Watergate was still a relatively fresh memory.

It is appalling to me that our kids today have been trained to such obedience.

 

[semi-ambivalent]

You nailed it, Scott. It amazes me that people, who haven't even read the article, are so quick to condemn the magazine.

s-a: Rolling Stone has been publishing political articles for decades. This is nothing new, for them. Did you read it?

Eddie,

I've been avoiding that publication for decades. The occasional glance just re-affirms my decision. Point taken on their content history but I still think their choice of covers was manipulative, and for economic reasons.

As for the whole Boston Event I'm staying away from the coverage. I believe he did it and that it qualifies as premeditated murder. I hope "the system" is fair but grinds him up well. But I'm not a Capital kind of guy.


say hi to HN for me.

s-a

 

[eddie]

I probably haven't purchased a copy of RS since The Clash were on the cover. I wouldn't even have known about this issue were it not for the uproar surrounding it.
I agree with you on the Boston Event. I'm also not a Capital guy...
HN?

 

[gleaf]

Letters to advertisers can me most effective. Most companies can not survive a small percentage drop in their revenue. It just has to show up in their cash flow. They will feel the pain and they will learn.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

Letters to advertisers can me most effective. Most companies can not survive a small percentage drop in their revenue. It just has to show up in their cash flow. They will feel the pain and they will learn.

Why? They're simply exercising their right to print a viewpoint. Having not read the article (or any other RS in decades) I cannot comment on content. Because you disagree with something you want to put people out of work? It is the price we pay for our freedom.

 

[eddie]

The "uproar" over the magazine's decision to publish the article has probably increased sales well beyond the normal expectation. And, I would guess, the vast majority complaining about it never even read it. I think that probability says more about us than the article does about the creation of terrorists.

 

[Benoît99]

I said this earlier on PetaPixel but I think it bears repeating.

The before photo is the right photo, not the after photo taken by the police. On the cover, RS calls him a "monster" and the article tries to give the reader some insight into who he was and what he became.

The next monster may also be a nice looking, likeable young man. He may be dating your daughter. You need to understand that and try to learn as much as you can about human behavior so that there's a better chance that he can be stopped BEFORE it's late.

 

[dpurdy]

I wonder if he bought 5 copies for his mother.

 

[tron_]

I am having really hard time understanding why many people today have this tendency to form extremely strong opinion about something without really giving something a thought and comprehend the issue fully. Reaction to today's issue seem to be lead by impulse and impression rather than logic, facts, and thought.

Coupled with today's instant communication, once some opinion or two get started, it seem to grow on its own power, drive social consensus, and political directions. Then all the sudden, something new happens and the process repeat all over again and yesterday's issue gets completely forgotten.

I takes me a good while to form an opinion, let alone, an informed opinion. Maybe I'm just slow.

I feel the exact same way. Maybe I'm slow too

 

[blansky]

I am having really hard time understanding why many people today have this tendency to form extremely strong opinion about something without really giving something a thought and comprehend the issue fully. Reaction to today's issue seem to be lead by impulse and impression rather than logic, facts, and thought.

Coupled with today's instant communication, once some opinion or two get started, it seem to grow on its own power, drive social consensus, and political directions. Then all the sudden, something new happens and the process repeat all over again and yesterday's issue gets completely forgotten.

I takes me a good while to form an opinion, let alone, an informed opinion. Maybe I'm just slow.

I don't see this as anything new. People have always formed tribes around events whether its at work, at the coffee shop, the bar, or meetings.

People are firstly lazy, want to fit in and rarely will stand up for what the believe in, if they actually believe in anything at all.

The Internet and social media just allows for larger and more anonymous tribes to join.

I agree forming an opinion takes time and expressing it demands backing it up with facts, not just parroting some loudmouth.

As for the photograph in question, the impact is from the fact that a monster can look so nice. Any anybody can be a monster.

In the US we want our monsters to look menacing, otherwise going to the mall can be too scary. Nuance and critical thinking are too much work.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I don't see this as anything new. People have always formed tribes around events whether its at work, at the coffee shop, the bar, or meetings.

People are firstly lazy, want to fit in and rarely will stand up for what the believe in, if they actually believe in anything at all.

The Internet and social media just allows for larger and more anonymous tribes to join.

I agree forming an opinion takes time and expressing it demands backing it up with facts, not just parroting some loudmouth.

As for the photograph in question, the impact is from the fact that a monster can look so nice. Any anybody can be a monster.

In the US we want our monsters to look menacing, otherwise going to the mall can be too scary. Nuance and critical thinking are too much work.

People forget the monsters that walked amongst us don't all look like Theodore Kaczynski (sp?) the Unabomber or Charles Manson. Eric and Lyle Menendez, Ted Bundy, Richard Ramirez, and even Jeffrey Dahmer were all good-looking if not at least average joes.