Boston magazine editor: I’m not that upset about Rolling Stone’s cover

I asked John Wolfson, the editor who gave us a Boston bombing cover that everybody loved, what he has to say about The Bomber cover that so many people hate.

The Boston magazine editor writes in an email:

“There are people here in the city, and even on my staff, who are really angry about the cover, but I’m having a hard time getting as upset as everyone else.covers I completely understand how the cover could be interpreted as glamorizing Tsarnaev and, in a way that further wounds the victims, painting him in a sympathetic light. But I think that interpretation misses the point of what Rolling Stone was trying to do, which was to spotlight just how unlikely it would have seemed on April 14 that his kid could have done something like this.

“Could the execution have been better? I think so. The cover language describes Tsarnaev himself as a victim, and from my perspective at least, that was insensitive to the people who were killed and wounded in the bombings. But overall, it’s my opinion that the outrage has been to some degree out of proportion to the magazine’s offenses.”

* “This would make a great poster…” | It became one, too (

ALSO: Rolling Stone’s cover is brilliant, says Mark Joseph Stern (