But to the cover itself, and "what's really wrong" with it - that it's being "marketed for kids".
Since I can't read the actual report you linked to, and the nearby summaries seem a bit vague for my tastes, I will, for the purposes of this discussion, assume that the image can harm kids. I just don't have the proper tools to argue otherwise.
Now, Marvel may not have given it an appropriate rating if that's true. And if so, it is right to criticize them for that. Bad on Marvel.
However, I don't think it's fair in that case to only criticize Marvel, or even blame them the most. Or even blame the retailers who might leave the things on the racks in plain sight.
I think, ultimately, the lion's share of the blame rests with the parents, if some kid gets hold of a copy of that comic - and if harm is done, they are the ones to hold accountable.
It is a parent's responsibility to monitor and, if need be, censor what their child sees. It is their duty to talk things out with their kids if they experience some troubling stimuli. It is the parent's standards that will determine what is appropriate for a child to have. It makes no sense to think that, if Marvel gives the okay for kids as young as nine to see the HfH cover, a truly concerned parent will not even bother to look at the cover and what's depicted thereon to make up their own mind whether their precious darling's headmeats will explode. After all, you don't look at the cover and say "oh, Marvel says it's okay for ages 9 on up, it must be harmless" - why would any concerned parent? A rating is a guideline, not a command from God - it can't force the books into kids' sweaty fingers.
(A quick aside about Marvel's ratings: yes, that rating says 9 and up, but right next to it it also recommends that parents review the material before unleashing it on their kids. Me, I think that's a sensible policy.)
Placing the entire responsibility for kid brain damage on Marvel is letting parents abdicate their own responsibility. But, if some parent thinks it is okay (despite the voices of the comics fandom), or just doesn't care enough to keep bad evil comics out of kids' hands, it can't be the duty of some non-parent to make those parenting choices for them. And I don't think it is fair to make Marvel primarily responsible for other people's kids and their mental health.
Re: Deleted and reposted for borked HTML, sorry.
Since I can't read the actual report you linked to, and the nearby summaries seem a bit vague for my tastes, I will, for the purposes of this discussion, assume that the image can harm kids. I just don't have the proper tools to argue otherwise.
Now, Marvel may not have given it an appropriate rating if that's true. And if so, it is right to criticize them for that. Bad on Marvel.
However, I don't think it's fair in that case to only criticize Marvel, or even blame them the most. Or even blame the retailers who might leave the things on the racks in plain sight.
I think, ultimately, the lion's share of the blame rests with the parents, if some kid gets hold of a copy of that comic - and if harm is done, they are the ones to hold accountable.
It is a parent's responsibility to monitor and, if need be, censor what their child sees. It is their duty to talk things out with their kids if they experience some troubling stimuli. It is the parent's standards that will determine what is appropriate for a child to have. It makes no sense to think that, if Marvel gives the okay for kids as young as nine to see the HfH cover, a truly concerned parent will not even bother to look at the cover and what's depicted thereon to make up their own mind whether their precious darling's headmeats will explode. After all, you don't look at the cover and say "oh, Marvel says it's okay for ages 9 on up, it must be harmless" - why would any concerned parent? A rating is a guideline, not a command from God - it can't force the books into kids' sweaty fingers.
(A quick aside about Marvel's ratings: yes, that rating says 9 and up, but right next to it it also recommends that parents review the material before unleashing it on their kids. Me, I think that's a sensible policy.)
Placing the entire responsibility for kid brain damage on Marvel is letting parents abdicate their own responsibility. But, if some parent thinks it is okay (despite the voices of the comics fandom), or just doesn't care enough to keep bad evil comics out of kids' hands, it can't be the duty of some non-parent to make those parenting choices for them. And I don't think it is fair to make Marvel primarily responsible for other people's kids and their mental health.