02-16-2018 12:28:03 PM -0800
01-23-2018 09:55:12 AM -0800
01-18-2018 11:02:22 AM -0800
01-09-2018 01:54:15 PM -0800
12-22-2017 09:40:32 AM -0800
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.


Should Rolling Stone Have Put Boston Bomber on its Cover?

Rolling Stone, no stranger to controversy, usually features rock stars, super models, and other celebrities on its cover.

But the August 3 edition of the music magazine features a self-portrait of Boston bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, which generated immediate outrage on social media and caused several pundits to weigh in angrily. Many believed that the magazine was glamorizing the terrorist.

1-3

Two brothers who both lost legs in the bomb blast, J.P. and Paul Norden, had a few choice words for Rolling Stone:

Instead, your irresponsible behavior did more to tear open wounds and insult victims, survivors and families that have been slowly healing and accepting the horrendous acts of terrorism. There is a very long road that awaits the involved victims and your magazine ripped at the hearts in an instance and cut at the deepest levels and for what, “To increase sales of a magazine that usually is worthy of music celebrities.” Well, Rolling Stones, you just reclaimed your 15 minutes of fame, we only hope, it lasts only fifteen minutes.

We've heard from the families. We've heard from the pundits. Now it's your turn. Leave a comment below telling us whether you think Rolling Stone should have featured a terrorist on its cover. If you're not registered to comment, please take a few seconds to do so.