Runs4Sanity
http://www.courierpress.com/news/2013/jul/18/bomber-rock-star-rolling-stone-cover-outrage/
I don't exactly know how I should feel, but I know if I was a friend or family of the victims I would be seriously pissed off about this. I don't buy from Rolling Stones anyways, but this just seems offensive and like they are making this dirtbag out to be some sort of martyr or celebrity who is just misunderstood. I am judging this by the cover, I don't plan on reading their article, I don't plan on buying the mag.
*Do It For Yourself, Do It Because They Said It Was Impossible, Do It Because They Said You Were Incapable*
PRs
5k - 24:15 (7:49 min/mile pace)
10k - 51:47 (8:16 min/mile pace)
15k -1:18:09 (8:24 min/mile pace)
13.1 - 1:53:12 (8:39 min/mile pace)
26:2 - 4:14:55 (9:44 min/mile)
running is bad for you
We're all talking about it so as I see it they (RS) won.
Time will tell if all this boycott talk really hurts their financials or not. My guess is no. "There is no such thing as bad advertising."
The last time I bought an issue of Rolling Stone was years ago. Back then, they only covered what was music related. Since when have they become the new Time magazine? I think their decision is based on sensationalism. I understand that the goal of every magazine is to make money, but you lose your readership when you lose credibility. Plus, they made him look like some sort of rock star. I hate that.
PRs: Boston Marathon, 3:27, April 15th 2013
Cornwall Half-Marathon, 1:35, April 27th 2013
18 marathons, 18 BQs since 2010
Doesn't bug me.
delicate flower
Congrats to Rolling Stone for bringing awareness to their magazine.
<3
Hip Redux
The last time I bought an issue of Rolling Stones was years ago. Back then, they only covered what was music related. Since when have they become the new Time magazine? I think their decision is based on sensationalism. I understand that the goal of every magazine is to make money, but you lose your readership when you lose credibility. Plus, they made him look like some sort of rock star. I hate that.
That's what bothers me about it - 1) They did it because they knew the reaction they were going to get (even though they deny it) and 2) he looks like a damn rock star. It's weird.
If the terrorist who did this was an ugly mofo, somehow I think they would have gone with a different cover option.
There's about a dozen stores who won't sell it, so I would guess that will hit their pocketbooks, but honestly, at this point, I don't even care. I'd like to just stop seeing it altogether!
It does not matter how he is portrayed, the only ass he will ever touch again in his life will have two nuts attached to it. If there is someone out there that finds spending the rest of their lives in prison appealing, they had problems before this issue went to print.
Now that would have made an interesting cover. LOL
+100 to Lily and LRB's post
Right? That is what people want to see, him suffering. That is not the job though of a magazine, their job is to generate sales and/or discussion about their product. When it is spirited debate or heated discussion, that is even better.
Mission accomplished.
I won't be reading it as I have seen enough regarding the brothers. I will read anything about the victims' recoveries, and heroes. The last time I bought RS, Don Henley was on the cover talking about the breakup of the Eagles (H freezes over quote). Boycotts are seldom effective and I don't expect this to make a dent in their earnings either with all the attention. I bet that this issue actually sells more than they normally do.
If anyone wants to read the article but not support RS go to your local library which is where I get RW.
Right? That is what people want to see, him suffering. That is not the job though of a magazine, their job is to generate sales and/or discussion about their product. When it is spirited debate or heated discussion, that is even better. Mission accomplished.
I agree - but there is a line. Too much controversy, and you go down in flames like Paula Deen. Just enough controversy and you're OK. I happen to think they went too far, and will likely see an advertiser and retail hit from it.
And a classy comeback from one of RS editors.
“I guess we should have drawn a d**k on Dzhokhar's face or something?” tweeted senior editor Christian Hoard on Wednesday, before abruptly deleting it.
And free advertising for those stores too! BUT they are only not carrying that issue and will go back to their regularly scheduled program next month.
And a classy comeback from one of RS editors. “I guess we should have drawn a d**k on Dzhokhar's face or something?” tweeted senior editor Christian Hoard on Wednesday, before abruptly deleting it.
What's funny is that that'd get a much more positive reaction!