Too Attractive For the Cover Of The Rolling Stone?

Chik-Fil-A should think about selling that issue in the Boston area to increase sales.
 
I thought the Man of the Year was supposed to be a dictator.

mossadeg.jpg
 
Leave video magazines/movies/games/comics/books etc. alone.

I swear to God I'm going to shoot myself in the head if this trend of "concern" ( really just smug activist/buybody bullsh*t ) about every goddamn little thing in every goddamn medium doesn't go away soon.
 
I'm having trouble seeing what is wrong with the photo, to be honest. Though at first glance one might just think, "Whoa, how did JoanK get on Rolling Stone?!" Magazines shouldn't be obligated to portray criminals in the worst possible light. In fact, didn't some magazine actually take flak for trying to make OJ look more dark and ominous or something? Can't have it both ways...

This.

I can't believe the news is even reporting this story. If the news didn't report it, it wouldn't be a big deal. All they have to do is ignore the right wing haters. They are probably jealous they aren't as pretty as this kid. Although I wouldn't want to be pretty and in prison...
 
Yeah, he's obviously an attractive young man ( to the extent I can tell as a hetero anyhow. ) So what? I guess we could make an evil caricature of him or something? I dunno.
 
Make a cover that outrages a lot of people. Watch sales go through the roof.

The Free Market is a silly place.
It's only a model

Shhhh!
 
Next month Casey Anthony, the month after George Zimmerman. Hell yeah! I love capitalism.
 
They could do a swimsuit issue for Casey Anthony and then, in the name of gender equality, do a swimsuit issue for Zimmerman as well.
 
Yeah I'm not seeing anything wrong with this. I mean, I'm not getting the "rock star image" with that bum fluff so front and center.
 
If local stores pulled it as a form of "too soon", then I don't see an issue with them doing so, although not all of those stores were local relative to the incident.

Otherwise, I don't see an issue with the magazine cover. Still, market forces will do whatever they want with it.
 
Leave video magazines/movies/games/comics/books etc. alone.

I swear to God I'm going to shoot myself in the head if this trend of "concern" ( really just smug activist/buybody bullsh*t ) about every goddamn little thing in every goddamn medium doesn't go away soon.

You regularly argue that video games should be regulated by the market and by consumers' decisions on what games to buy. How is the opposition to this cover any different? This concern is the market at work.

Saying a cover is de classe isn't censorship. The decision of retailers not to carry a magazine isn't censorship. Nor is the consumer uproar over the cover.

No one is telling Rolling Stone what they can and cannot print. Instead, some parties are saying that what they printed is unwanted.
 
Hm, well the cover was sure to cause a stir. On the other hand it seems even worse to me that the suspect is presented as convicted already, and a monster. Nice work by the media once again...
 
Back
Top Bottom