Making Superstars Out of Terrorists

Rolling Stone magazine’s recent decision to place Boston Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on its cover is just one more example of the media making celebrities out of criminals and superstars out of terrorists. Cheap attempts to stoke controversy and gain attention are a dime a dozen in the media.

Whether it’s by glamorizing a terrorist who took three lives and injured nearly 260 innocent civilians or whether it’s by injecting race into the Zimmerman trial when no evidence supported such a claim, the media continues to fall short in its responsibility to the public.

It should come as no surprise that media outlets like the New Yorker rushed to defend Rolling Stone from “the vitriol and closed-mindedness of the Web.” Yet what Rolling Stone’s defenders see as unjustified vitriol is more accurately described as a public fed up with the media’s constant glorification of violence.

In response to the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary, I wrote an piece examining the link between violence and mass culture. In the wake of Rolling Stone’s glamorization of the terrorist behind the tragedy in Boston, I think it merits another look.

At the time, I wrote:

By showering the deranged perpetrators of violence with attention, the media creates celebrities. Such a perverse incentive structure, present within contemporary American culture and media, distorts the perceived costs and benefits for mass shooters. A mentally ill teenager recognizes that he can go from anonymity to infamy overnight – this is wrong. Yet more than wrong, this reality is indicative of contemporary American culture, where immediacy, fame, and self-gratification prevail.

The American media continues to show itself all too willing to play the role of aggrandizer when mass violence takes place. It’s time for the media to take a step back and reexamine their professional ethics and responsibilities when it comes to covering national tragedies.