Our TV Shows

Got a Tip?

Call TMZ at (888) 847-9869 or Click Here


Boycotting Rolling Stone

Over Boston Bomber Cover

7/17/2013 9:50 AM PDT BY TMZ STAFF
Exclusive Details

The Boston supermarket chain Roche Bros. is also boycotting the magazine -- a rep tells TMZ, "When Roche Bros. learned of the cover for the current issue of Rolling Stone, we chose not to offer that product for sale in our stores. We join with our customers and neighbors in focusing on the recovery of the victims and our community."

Walgreens and Stop & Shop have also boycotted the magazine.

apparently believes the First Amendment has limits ... because the pharmacy chain just announced it won't hawk the latest issue of Rolling Stone, featuring Boston Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on the cover.

A rep for CVS says "As a company with deep roots in New England and a strong presence in Boston, we believe this is the right decision out of respect for the victims of the attack and their loved ones."

It's kind of a bizarre reaction, since the story is about how Tsarnaev "fell into radical Islam and became a monster."

So we gotta ask ...


No Avatar


quotes TMZ: "CVS apparently believes the First Amendment has limits ... because the pharmacy chain just announced it won't hawk the latest issue of Rolling Stone, featuring Boston Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on the cover."

Has anyone at TMZ ever READ the First Amendment? It doesn't prohibit a private business (CVS) from deciding not to sell a product published by another private business (Rolling Stone). The First Amendment applies ONLY to actions by government . Please read and learn about it before making stupid comments..


410 days ago


Minutes before the explosion there are navy seals, carrying bags, all around the bombing area. They even walking a drugged out patsy. During press conference, they announce they have someone, these photos leak, by hackers, and the story changes all of sudden and they accuse the brothers.
It must be hard to think for yourselves LOL look and see real evidence you guys are like lemmings so sad. bet you guys won't even look at it *****s

410 days ago


Putting this guy on the cover of a magazine only promotes him and will likely make other troubled kids think killing will make them famous. Bad call by Rolling Stone....

410 days ago


You'd think with a lawyer in charge over there, somebody would explain to the staff that the first amendment has nothing to do with private companies and individuals. It's strictly protects people from GOVERNMENT limiting free speech. Seriously Harvey, can you hold a government 101 class for your staff? You can be the first student.

410 days ago


They aren't glorifying him. They are showing you who he was before he became such a monster. They are journalists. It's their job to not demonize people. Everyone already knows he was a monster

410 days ago


Yo, "F.B.I. feat. MC Bomber", ... i guess a wonderful new career just has started...

410 days ago


Lord have Mersey, what a stunning glamour shot of this terrorist. I'm surprised rolling stone isn't selling. Posters of

Where do we draw the line at glorifying those who do such terrible things. The magazine says they're putting him in the magazine because of the demographics of they're readers, all the more reason to NOT show him as a poor misunderstood stud muffin....

410 days ago


So if People magazine put this as thier cover would you be so outraged? The situation is that you look at Rolling Stones and assume entertainment magazine. You would not see Bin Laden on the cover of OK magazine, but he has been on the cover of People and he killed more americans than any other terrorist to date.

410 days ago

I will BUY a thousand copies    

He's INNOCENT! He didn't do it! Google MK Ultra
Bravo Rolling Stone. I will buy a thousand copies!

410 days ago


They do have the right not sell what they choose, kudos CVS

410 days ago


'CVS apparently believes the First Amendment has limits...'

Whether you agree or disagree with the decision, CVS is not tacitly expressing a belief that the 'First Amendment has limits' through its actions. Had the U.S. government pressured CVS to boycott the magazine, or censored the cover or article content directly then, yes, this would be a constitutional issue.

One can credibly argue, in fact, that CVS is exercising the First Amendment, as both boycotts and buycotts are constitutionally-protected forms of expression.

You should not invoke a First Amendment argument if you do not understand it.

410 days ago

Hedy Putegnat    


410 days ago


FKN genius! dude loox like a freaking angel I'd F em' anti democratic would be if they weren't allowed to publish & distribute it. Controversial, definitely but hey remember this kid is an American !

410 days ago


I can't remember the last time I heard anyone talk about about Rolling Stone magazine, or really any magazine for that matter. At least they are becoming irrelevant with a bang.

410 days ago


Stop focusing on the terrorist and focus on the victims. There is nothing wrong with the content of the article, but that SOB should not be on the cover. How about the victims!

410 days ago
Previous 15 Comments | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Around The Web