The media in general portrays terrorists as people with inhuman behavior and of evil. They try to paint bomb suspects as rejects in the society and people who should not have a chance to give their side of side of the story. This was no different with Tsarnaev, the media in general portrayed him as a monster who and never focused in his "other  life or past. In their issue, Rolling Stone takes a different approach at how they look at the individual who was suspected of the bombing. Rolling Stone tries to evaluate his past life and finding reasons why he engaged in the bombing. What factors in his life motivated his actions. It however, is debatable on the question as to whether they are awarding him a celebrity status considering how they went about it. Putting him on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine which is on "normal  cases braced by celebrities and rap stars, is in a way giving him a celebrity status. The average American citizen or even anywhere else in the world takes what he or she is fed by the media seriously. In a large sense the sets the agenda for the public. They determine, to a big extent, which models will be talked about by the public, which music the public will be excited about and in this case, arguably, who will be the next celebrity. By putting him on the cover, they did just that. It is however risky to give him a celebrity status considering he will develop a following which will turn out to be counterproductive. This should not be mistaken as an outright rejection for the story, it is important that people also understand the "other  life of suspects like Tsarnaev. However, this should be done very carefully so it doesn't seem as though the acts they are suspected of are being glorified. Images, for instance the one used on the cover of Rolling Stone seems glorifying. Pictures taken and featured on the cover of a magazine tend to give the individuals featured a glorified look. Tsarnaev is made to appea