Well, we're big rock singers
We got golden fingers
And we're loved everywhere we go...(That sounds like us)
We sing about beauty and we sing about truth
At ten thousand dollars a show...(Right)
We take all kinds of pills that give us all kind of thrills
But the thrill we've never known
Is the thrill that'll getcha when you get your picture
On the cover of the Rollin' Stone
Well, what Dr. Hook didn't ever consider was to set off a bomb at the finish line of the Boston marathon.
Now, I'm not going to vilify Rolling Stone as much as some people have. It's pretty clear, from all reports, that the piece on Dzhokhar Tsarnaev isn't supportive of his cause. It's apparently an exploration of the path that took this young man from a good kid into a world of Islamic terrorism. That's 100% valid investigative journalism, and while I'm kinda sick to death of Rolling Stone's desire to be a bastion of investigative journalism, it is a story that would probably be good for a lot of people to understand.
But the cover.
The COVER of Rolling Stone.
That's supposed to be a great honor, a recognition to a musician who has "made it." Or a figure of import and interest, which, I have to admit, fits Tsarnaev, but how many other murderers has Rolling Stone featured on it's cover? Well, yes...Charles Manson, but that was a year after the Tate murders, not less than 6 months later.
The point is, the cover of Rolling Stone is not like Time or Newsweek, who, yes, could probably have easily used this photo as a cover without issue. Rolling Stone's cover infers a level of celebrity, of glamor, of fame, so much so that I find this choice on their part, not offensive...I am not offended...but it's stupid. It's ill-considered.
For a magazine which is more than a little about image and public relations...they should've known it was a bad idea.