Concerning the Rolling Stone article on the Boston marathon bomber (tsarnayav???). I don’t understand the uproar over them doing an article on him. They aren’t (and I haven’t read the article so here I could be wrong) glorifying him but rather analyzing him. This doesn’t seem at odds with journalistic curiosity. I suppose it might be nice if the press focused more on the victims but in America the victims are just a group to be referred to it is always the killer/assailant that is the focus. For this we can blame the press or we can blame the population that finds that as the more interesting angle. There were a lot of victims and the press simply isn’t going to go over each and every one of them. If they took that approach how could they have dealt with September 11, 2001? By the time they finished the thousands of articles about the victims the public would have lost interest. I don’t see it as odd or offensive or anything else that they did an article on Tsarnayv. I do find it odd that so many people who I consider sound rational human beings object to it. I get the impression they base their reaction solely on the photo on the cover. I get the impression that most of them have NOT read the article. The picture on the Rolling Stone cover I have read also appeared on the New York Times front page. Still no objection then. Why not? If it’s wrong now shouldn’t it have been wrong then??? The irrationality of humans always behooves me. I have been sent from another planet to observe mankind. It is not my charge to interfere, yet this totally befuddles me. Are humans truly this irrational??????????