Hey boys, and I’m talking to you young men between the ages of 18 to 26, would you like to be on the cover of a famous magazine? It’s easy! Just go out and commit an act of terror. The more bizarre the carnage, the better. You’ll be famous!
When I heard the Boston bomber was on the cover of Rolling Stone, I wasn’t particularly moved. But then I saw the picture they used. Geez, could he be any cuter? He looks like Jim Morrison of The Doors. Justin Bieber has nothing on him. They could’ve at least used a less glamorous shot, and that’s the crux of the whole matter. Does this cover glamorize terrorism?
Rolling Stone put Charles Manson on the cover years ago, but Manson looked far from cute. He had evil written all over him, which is I suppose, the whole idea behind this month’s cover shot, that this kid, who appeared at his arraignment disheveled with his arm in a cast and his face swollen, looks so innocent on the cover. I’m sure some people think this is fine, but it feels to me like the magazine is rubbing the victims’ noses in their bad fortune.
I’ve thought for the longest time that terrorists and mass murderers should lose their name and be assigned a number. Publish all the facts of the crime and the barest details about the criminal. Scientists and law enforcement professionals would study him, but the general public wouldn’t know his identity. No more notoriety for these monsters.Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun