Rolling Stone Magazine Under Fire For Putting Boston Bomb Suspect On Cover

Rolling Stone Magazine Under Fire...
Didn't see any post about this yet so here you go. Looks like he's already been found guilty in the court of the media circus. I don't personally care about the controversial aspect of all of this. I just thought it was a good excuse to remind everyone here on ATS to watch what's going on with this kid carefully. Despite what the media's been portraying Dzhokhar Tsarnaev as, he hasn't confessed to jack sh*t in person (only through convenient letters found around crime scenes and given to investigators while he was basically dying. wtf?) As a matter of fact, according to his mother he's only confessed his innocence and confusion.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev claims innocence in call to mother

I'm not saying he's innocent because I got as much proof of that as we do that he's guilty (zilch). But two dead suspects (one under completely ridiculous circumstances. Here, in case you haven't been following: FBI shoot third suspect during interrogation) and one who barely survived? Come on.

reply to post by the sloth


I'm pretty sure most of ATS has already convicted him as well. Not including yours truly.

reply to post by the sloth


Rolling Stones is pulled from all the CVS, Walgreens, Walmarts, and most chain gas stations here around New Orleans. I don't believe it's a huge conspiracy like some here do, but Rolling Stones should be able to put whoever the hell they please on their cover without fear of consequences. You get to choose from the mainstreams options not our own. It's ridiculous.

reply to post by Isittruee


Sounds like we're losing the right to free press.

What right do you think they'll go after next?

Didn't see any post about this yet ...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by alfa1


Yeah I know he beat me to it lol. I hope people still post in this one though. I could really care less about rolling stone tbh. Just a shameless marketing ploy obviously.

reply to post by Kharron


I agree that Rolling Stone has the right to print whatever they want under the First Amendment. If they're prepared to deal with the consequences, more power to em I say. However, what in blazes could they possibly be writing about when the suspect in question hasn't even given his side of the story to anyone? Did they get a secret interview with the kid somehow. Doubtful, but worth looking into.

reply to post by Isittruee


The whole thing is retarded. There are plenty of magazines that already put the guy on the front cover. Now Rolling Stone is getting heat just because they put the most appealing looking picture on theirs. They forgot to photoshop the devil horns, curly mustache, and swastika onto his face and their gonna suffer for it. People sure are regoddamndiculous.

Originally posted by the sloth
reply to post by Kharron

 

I agree that Rolling Stone has the right to print whatever they want under the First Amendment. If they're prepared to deal with the consequences, more power to em I say. However, what in blazes could they possibly be writing about when the suspect in question hasn't even given his side of the story to anyone? Did they get a secret interview with the kid somehow. Doubtful, but worth looking into.

I believe they interviewed friends, teachers, etc. to get some kind of awareness of who he was as a person. My only beef is that they kind of set him up to be sort of a bad-boy rock star type. Apparently they talk about girls being crazy about him.... What the heck does that have to do with anything?