Today the output of our country’s tedious outrage machine relates to the above Rolling Stone cover about Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (also spelled Jahar). It glamorizes him. It turns him . . . actually, there’s no point in summarizing the objections. Why not just skim Twitter for 1.5 seconds and find multiple representative samples:

Counterpoints:

*Presumably the protesters would have a tabloid treatment in which Rolling Stone would place horns on Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Perhaps that would have made this nonsense go away.

*This is good journalism, as the photo depicts the same Dzhokhar Tsarnaev that The Post and the New York Times — and others — depicted in deeply reported pieces. That is, a regular, good guy with friends, interests and activities — a “joker,” even.

*Showing this alleged bomber in his full humanity makes him appear even more menacing.

*Some are saying that Rolling Stone is exploiting this image — this story — for commercial gain. Well, Rolling Stone is a magazine. It exploits all its stories for commercial gain, some more effectively than others.

RELATED: Tsarnaev just latest in controversial magazine covers

Erik Wemple writes the Erik Wemple blog, where he reports and opines on media organizations of all sorts.