Funny Or Die Corrects Rolling Stone’s Controversial Cover

As was the intention, Rolling Stone caught lots of attention with its new cover, which features Boston bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev front and center. Funny or Die wasted no time in taking the magazine to task.

There is a right way and a wrong way to deal with moral outrage. You can vent it impotently, perhaps over social media, or you can channel your frustrations creatively into a personal statement that makes your point in some interesting fashion.

The first way seems to be the preferred method of most people who were offended by the latest Rolling Stone cover, a grainy selfie of Boston bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who is quietly boy band-material in the looks department.

However, the staff at Funny or Die chose instead to roll up its sleeves and prepare a takedown of the old school and new media forces competing within Jann Wenner’s Rolling Stone empire, which led to this cover. Compare the two versions below. And you’ll also find it worthwhile to read Boston mayor Thomas Menino’s letter responding to Rolling Stone here.

Add New Comment


  • flkylo

    Why's it sexulising to display someone as human. Fucking idiot. It's fine to glorify every other type of criminal but someone who is a "terrorist" must only be viewed as an evil monster, rather than an honest look at a human being  that did something terrible. Obama kills children every day but i don't here anything about his sanctimonious piece of shit face contantly being forced on people as a power for good. Bullshit, your a Joke. 

  • Bibi88

    Hang on... this guy has yet to be convicted in a court of law. He claims he didn't do it, so how on earth can he get a fair trial with all this media furore? Trial by media or what? He probably did do it, and deserves to be punished to the full extent of the law, but that's isn't the point, the media shouldn't be allowed to behave this way.

  • Charlie Desertly

    What I don't get about all the controversy is the idea, as they wrote here, of "sexualizing" him.  It's a picture of him.  It's what he looks like.  It's a picture of him looking the way he looks.  If your problem is that he looks kind of attractive, how is that Rolling Stone's fault?  Would you have felt more comfortable if he was ugly?

  • kate

    if you look at the old rolling stone cover with jim morrison on the cover, its practically identical. ever hear of subliminal messaging?

  • Sam Snead

    Granted Bin Laden, Charles Manson and others appeared on the cover in years prior. There's obviously a method behind the magazines madness featuring these sociopaths. I wish that people that commit such horrific crimes wouldn't get such glorification. It's only giving them just what they want. I believe it also encourages others that could be on the verge of carrying out heinous crimes. I'm all for freedom of speech/press, but let's not reward the bottom feeders of the world for taking lives and attempting to take away from our country's greatness.

  • trucka joe

    No matter what you think, this scumbag has more press than he ever intended.