It's a good cover, and yeah aesthetically better designed than RS' usual and definitely better than the amateur crap at time and Newsweek, but I don't think means they're in any way glamourising, they are using the best image they could find that best represents the contents of the article. That's just good graphic design and a concern for aesthetics. I guess now it's bad to use good graphic design if you're reporting about a bad dude? lol
And making him 'interesting'? He's already interesting on his own. It's an interesting story. Doesn't mean he's not an asshole but he's definitely already interesting. And I'm more interested in reading an in-depth, by all accounts subtle piece of journalism than the black-and-white sensationalistic crap most of the media specialises in.