Political Forums
Page 3 of 5 12 3 45
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Political Forums (http://www.politicalchat.org/index.php)
-   Current events (http://www.politicalchat.org/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Rolling Stone being pilloried in the news (http://www.politicalchat.org/showthread.php?t=6012)

BlueStreak 07-18-2013 04:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell (Post 165160)
Maybe. But RS has already put a semi "Mea culpa" on their web site accompanying the article which seems to side-step the issue of the "glam" photo.

RS has done some excellent journalistic work over the years, but they've also had a history of pursuing magazine covers that elicit a "reaction" from their readers. I guess they shouldn't be too surprised when they get a reaction from some that is negative.
What magazine doesn't try to elicit a reaction from their readers with provocative cover photos?:confused:

Isn't that the whole point of a cover photo, to attract attention?

Come on, now.

Dave

JJIII 07-18-2013 05:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueStreak (Post 165223)
What magazine doesn't try to elicit a reaction from their readers with provocative cover photos?:confused:

Isn't that the whole point of a cover photo, to attract attention?

Come on, now.

Dave

"Tell it like it is".:D

JJIII 07-18-2013 05:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueStreak (Post 165223)
What magazine doesn't try to elicit a reaction from their readers with provocative cover photos?:confused:

Isn't that the whole point of a cover photo, to attract attention?

Come on, now.

Dave

"Tell it like it is".:D

(Apologies to Aaron Neville)

noonereal 07-18-2013 07:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueStreak (Post 165223)
What magazine doesn't try to elicit a reaction from their readers with provocative cover photos?:confused:
Dave
Somehow I am not understanding the outrage.

Isn't there a story in the paper about the Boston bombing?

Isn't this a pic of one of the bombers?

Is this not standard?

When I see a picture of someone on the cover of a paper, to me, it means there is a story related to that picture inside. Am I missing something?

noonereal 07-18-2013 07:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell (Post 165160)
the "glam" photo.

So if they had a photo of the same guy with his eyed crossed it would be OK?

Oerets 07-18-2013 07:30 AM
I see this like most controversies in the media. Distractions from the real problems facing us. Ones to complex to understand, explain in three minute segments or to hard to face and fix.



Barney

Dondilion 07-18-2013 11:42 AM
It a carry over for the demise of their darling General McChrystal.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_A._McChrystal

Charles 07-18-2013 11:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by noonereal (Post 165245)
So if they had a photo of the same guy with his eyed crossed it would be OK?
I would have preferred a picture of him doing the perp walk in an orange jump suit, but that may poison the jury pool.

But it's their magazine, and I respect their right to do with it as they please.

Chas

bobabode 07-18-2013 11:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dondilion (Post 165295)
It a carry over for the demise of their darling General McChrystal.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_A._McChrystal
;) Yep, you betcha. The wingnuts are still smarting over RS exposing him and trashing his career.

icenine 07-19-2013 12:20 AM
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/bomb...one-6C10671779


looks like the fuss has died down.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:34 AM.
Page 3 of 5 12 3 45
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.