The Ledge

The Ledge (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/index.php)
-   Chit Chat (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   truly disgusting rolling stone (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=52349)

olive 07-17-2013 06:45 AM

truly disgusting rolling stone
 
just to sell a magazine

just beyond words . that are printable



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3607630.html t

Macfanforever 07-17-2013 08:12 AM

Maybe people should boycott the magazine.

He has nothing to do about music unless they report what kind of music on his Ipod.

They could of put FM on the cover mouths ago when they were on tour.

chiliD 07-17-2013 10:42 AM

First off, Rolling Stone magazine hasn't been a "music magazine" for at least 25 years.

I don't understand the outrage. Various magazines have put Charles Manson, Jeffery Dahmer, Osama Bin Laden, et al on their covers before...yes, villains sell magazines. Isn't that the point of issuing a magazine, to sell it? Otherwise, why bother?

Look at the crap that gets put on the front of a daily newspaper or even the main page of a news website, what's the difference?

If you want "nice" magazine covers, subscribe to Cat Fancy or Modern Dog.

jbrownsjr 07-17-2013 10:55 AM

I'm gonna have to agree with Chili here. Didn't Time Magazine have Hitler on their cover back in the 30's? It's journalism.

Macfanforever 07-17-2013 11:23 AM

Yes I know.It's like the cable TV channels brand themselves as MTV VH1 and they run crap shows that are not related to music.

Yes this is the way they sell magazines.

louielouie2000 07-17-2013 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiliD (Post 1098843)
First off, Rolling Stone magazine hasn't been a "music magazine" for at least 25 years.

I don't understand the outrage. Various magazines have put Charles Manson, Jeffery Dahmer, Osama Bin Laden, et al on their covers before...yes, villains sell magazines. Isn't that the point of issuing a magazine, to sell it? Otherwise, why bother?

Look at the crap that gets put on the front of a daily newspaper or even the main page of a news website, what's the difference?

If you want "nice" magazine covers, subscribe to Cat Fancy or Modern Dog.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbrownsjr (Post 1098845)
I'm gonna have to agree with Chili here. Didn't Time Magazine have Hitler on their cover back in the 30's? It's journalism.

I agree with both of you. I think what Rolling Stone has done here is pretty provocative; they are getting people who may not normally read about world events/politics to read about this tragedy. Perhaps they'll incite folks to take a bit more interest in news instead of the latest scandal involving Justib Bieber or Lindsay Lohan. Maybe getting these people to read this terrorist's story will even help avert future tragedies by helping folks realize their friend/relative/neighbor/coworker exhibits similar signs that the Boston Bombers did? As a nation, we cannot simply keep ignoring our enemies & tamping out their stories. Elsewise we can't learn from these horrible tragedies, and they are bound to be repeated.

olive 07-17-2013 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiliD (Post 1098843)
First off, Rolling Stone magazine hasn't been a "music magazine" for at least 25 years.

I don't understand the outrage. Various magazines have put Charles Manson, Jeffery Dahmer, Osama Bin Laden, et al on their covers before...yes, villains sell magazines. Isn't that the point of issuing a magazine, to sell it? Otherwise, why bother?

Look at the crap that gets put on the front of a daily newspaper or even the main page of a news website, what's the difference?

If you want "nice" magazine covers, subscribe to Cat Fancy or Modern Dog.

it's the glamor boy pose glorifying him as he wanted

QueenStevie 07-17-2013 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by olive (Post 1098849)
it's the glamor boy pose glorifying him as he wanted

Yeah, I agree that magazine is truly disgusting! Hoping Rolling Stone's plan to sell a lot of copies of that issue BACKFIRES on them!

becca 07-17-2013 02:08 PM

I've had a personal boycott against that lame-ass magazine for years, and not because of politics. They made lots of (dirty) money plastering Kurt Cobain's face all over it same as with Lennon or Morrison or Tupac. Not sure if this is really a new low for them.

FMlex 07-17-2013 04:12 PM

Coming from an extremely leftwing magazine, this cover doesn't surprise me at all.

Like another poster said, that organization will do anything to sell a magazine.

becca 07-17-2013 05:16 PM

They could have put the three victims' faces on the cover.

olive 07-17-2013 05:20 PM

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.n...96937064_n.jpg

mylittledemon 07-17-2013 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiliD (Post 1098843)
First off, Rolling Stone magazine hasn't been a "music magazine" for at least 25 years.

I don't understand the outrage. Various magazines have put Charles Manson, Jeffery Dahmer, Osama Bin Laden, et al on their covers before...yes, villains sell magazines. Isn't that the point of issuing a magazine, to sell it? Otherwise, why bother?

Pretty much this. I say hit RS where it hurts and don't buy their publication.

SteveMacD 07-17-2013 09:40 PM

Dr. Hook must be pissed.

MikeInNV 07-17-2013 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveMacD (Post 1098885)
Dr. Hook must be pissed.

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:25 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 1995-2003 Martin and Lisa Adelson, All Rights Reserved