Slashdot Mirror
Playboy Launches Safe For Work Website
If you're one of the three people in the world who actually reads Playboy for the articles, today is your lucky day. Every young boy's favorite magazine to find in their uncle's closet has launched a "safe for work" website. From the article: "TheSmokingJacket.com will contain none of the nudity that makes Playboy.com NSFW — not suitable for work. Instead, it'll rely on humor to reach Playboy's target audience, men 25 to 34 years old, when they are most likely to be in front of a computer screen."
I only read slashdot for the +5 comments. Geeking out and squeeing as copyleft and open source take over is in no way my motivation.
Er, what is the point? Oh that's right - everyone *reads* Playboy for the humor and interesting articles... (rolls eyes)
Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
Just this story icon makes this Slashdot story NSFW
yeah this is the Playboy SFW site: about:blank
"This site contains content from the following categories: Adult/Mature Content;Entertainment; and has been automatically blocked". It is distinguised from playboy.com (category:Pornography), but unless they can get the "Mature" label dropped this will remain just beyond reach.
I work at the SEC, and this does nothing for me.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
Looks like the site content categorizing service my office's proxy uses has it marked as 'adult', I imagine that will be the case for many others as well.
Yes, with titles like: "How to get laid at work" I'd view it as totally safe for work........
Assuming you work in a brothel.
Uh huh. So I guess they will have about 2 visitors a month to this site?
My childhood dream of looking at naked women with their clothes on is fulfilled.
The internets. Now with clothed women!
I lol'd and then I cried :(
The last time I read playboy was about five years ago when I picked up a super cheap subscription for a year. The first issue I received had stories on Elvis. The next one featured Marilyn Monroe. Apparently Playboy doesn't realize that the baby boomers are no longer in their twenties and thirties.
Jokes about "reading the articles" aside, Playboy was once a great source for relevant articles, both fiction and non-fiction, but that ceased to be the case a couple of decades ago.
There used to be some interesting interviews and the like in Playboy magazing, in addition to the skin.
The problem is these articles on thesmokingjacket.com are written for morons. "Get Kinky in Your Backwards Robe" about having sex in a Snuggie. "Larger than Life" - does some chick with 38KKK fake boobs have the world's biggest fake boobs? "Can he survive without hairspray" about Jimmy Johnson's hairdo. "How to get laid at work". That sort of speaks for itself.
I mean, I was thinking a bit like Esquire, but this looks like CollegeHumor.com without the humor, mixed with one of those magazines your wife or girlfriend secretly likes to read in the checkout line but is too embarrassed to buy.
There are a lot of things that are NSFW that don't contain images. Hate speech is NSFW, or at least it has been for my last three employers, as per their internet use policies. Many filters block sites that contain certain words. I haven't checked out the site, nor do I intend to, so I don't know what kind of content it has, but I can guess that it will still be NSFW.
I once ran up against this problem at an employer when I was using a search engine to help me find a solution to a technical problem. One particular hit appeared to have the answer I was looking for, but since it was a forum where someone posted a racial epithet, it was getting blocked. I asked the net admin to look into it, and that was what he found. He emailed the relevant text to me (sans epithet), and that was that.
Hey there big boy, you wanna look at my articlezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz !!!!
(slaps face to wake up to post comment)
Take Nobody's Word For It.
who wants to see that?
The meme: useless without pic is most appropriate here.
You can't handle the truth.
Tits or GTFO.
Who honestly reads playboy for the PICTURES these days? I dunno about everyone else, but I find the myriad free videos available online to be vastly superior to any still image, much less the glossy airbrushed crap playboy brings to the table.
On the other hand, at least in years past, Playboy has had some phenomenal articles- both serious, semi-serious, and just funny. I know they used to run a jokes page as well which was always good for laughs.
I haven't actually held a playboy for a long time now, but my point is the same- why pay for stills when you can get video free?
Well Mister Jones, the corporate office wants us to run this outside web filter to increase productivity. If the company's primary slogan starts with "Entertainment" and the company's name is "PlayBoy" Why do you want to look at it while you're at Work, Man?
Sadly, a Libertarian cannot force his views on another, and freedom cannot spread as does the cancer known as religion.
I want to work at the company that would allow this as "Safe for work". Good grief.
Poor means hoping the toothache goes away.
I suppose they broke new ground in the late 1950s, and stayed semi-relevant until the 1980s.
But now?
...but not mine. If I hit a single site that's not tech-related, I'm asked about it. Fortunately, there's some seriously entertaining stuff out there that Websense categorizes as "Information Technology!" ;-)
Ironic and self-amusing that upstart Maxim has better articles and pics I enjoy more. ( I like my mind to do the final mile).
PS. "whorls" was my captcha
The video's are filtered by geolocation, same as hulu.
Not using an American IP = 'This video is unavailable in your location.'
Our Barracuda web filters see the site as porn. Whether is its or not doesn't really matter to the management types around here. They see the report and the porn category is flagged. You can guess what happens next
I know the US is permanently emotionally and intellectually scarred due to the impact of fucking puritans,
but calling Playboy "porn" is way over the edge. If Playboy is "porn", then looking at images of the
Venus de Milo must be considered "viewing amputee fetish porn"...
*** Sigs are a stupid waste of bandwidth.
This thread is worthless without pictures.
I said this about the Marge Simpson centerfold and I'll say it again: I think Playboy is doing the smart thing, as ridiculous as it may seem to most people.
The usual jokes about "who reads it" aside, who pay$ for it? No seriously, who pays money for pictures of chicks when there's a whole fucking internet out there that you can access for free? If I wanna see some boobies I can have them on my screen in a few seconds and no one is going to make a dime. I just can't believe there's much money in the photography considering how competitive that business is, and how low the barrier to entry is. If Playboy's business model is to keep going on trying to sell photos of beautiful women, they might as close shop, because this former giant is now nobody. Technology laid waste to their old market.
That leaves the non-nude content as essentially all they have. There's still the looming question of whether the "all they have," is good enough to sustain them, but it's their best chance. And if the nudes don't make them money but keep them out of parts of the market, then The Thing To Do is pretty obvious, as weird and non-Playboyish as it seems.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
What is today more irrelevant than playboy?
Playboy is a magazine for guys that want to masturbate. In the 70's, guys jerked off to pictures of tits, and playboy was very popular. In the 80's, they wanted to masturbate to moving pictures, and not stills, without the VHS-fucking goodness, playboy was less relevant. In the 90's, guys wanted to masturbate to moving, hardcore pictures, playboy became even less relevant. In the last decade, people wanted to masturbate to free videos of midgets dressed in little pokemon suites fucking their mothers with giant dildos shaped like bill clinton's cigar. Playboy still offers pictures of tits printed in dead trees.
They almost when bankrupt in 2007, and now they almost go bankrupt every day. This is just a lame attempt to reinvent themselves.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
I am not sure where they think people work. But at my workplace we WORK. And "Playboy", nude pictures or not, is not an appropriate work-related site for us, period.
I thought their market was people who didn't have access to the internet.
Given that Internet access on a laptop away from home or public Wi-Fi hotspots still costs 60 USD per month in the United States (Playboy's home country), the market for print is bigger than you might first think.
to increase productivity
People are supposed to visit entertainment sites while on break; that's why it's called a break.
there's a whole fucking internet out there that you can access for free?
A print magazine doesn't need a $60 per month data plan.
Playboy has better articles and features than it does naked models.
In fact, it makes no sense to get Playboy for the nudity. Sort of a ripoff, especially if you're not into big buxom blonde white women.
The articles are definitely worth reading, as far as magazines go.
Every issue has relevant and insightful political commentary, and one of the very rare publications that directly oppose police corruption and brutality. If nothing else, you ought to support them as a last bastion of sound and reasonable popular American politics...their platform very much aligns with the young progressive internet generation.
Should I go on? The playboy advisor is almost always spot on. They publish celebrity nip-slips, a fave of mine. Every issue has at least one serious non-fiction article, and usually a good fiction, too. Popular sports analysis and predictions...what the fuck do you want from a men's magazine?
The following administrative alert was sent by WebMarshal.
A download to 'http://idle.slashdot.org/story/10/07/21/1540224/Playboy-Launches-Safe-For-Work-Website?art_pos=7' was blocked for (deleted) on (deleted)
This action was triggered by the rule: Content Analysis Rules\TextCensor Rules\Block Offensive Content.
Additional Information:
File Name: D:\Marshal Data\WebMarshal\ProxyTemp\WM_31075_Playboy-Launches-Safe-For-Work-Website
File Type: HTML
File Size: 124 KB
TextCensor Matches:
TextCensor Script 'Pornographic Content' triggered with total weighting of 15:
Expression '(breasts OR breast) AND NOT (cancer OR anatomy OR physiology)' triggered 1 time, weighting 2
Expression 'adult FOLLOWEDBY (sex OR material OR entertainment OR links)' triggered 1 time, weighting 2
Expression 'boobs AND tits AND nipples' triggered 1 time, weighting 1
Expression 'fucking' triggered 1 time, weighting 2
Expression 'hardcore OR hard core' triggered 1 time, weighting 1
Expression 'nipples' triggered 1 time, weighting 1
Expression 'nudity' triggered 1 time, weighting 1
Expression 'porn' triggered 1 time, weighting 2
Expression 'pornography' triggered 1 time, weighting 2
Expression 'sex OR sexy' triggered 1 time, weighting 1
There's nothing adult or mature going on here at work. I swear.
Have gnu, will travel.
For those that don't read playboy, I highly suggest you read some of the articles and interviews. They are almost always excellent.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I thought it was for 70+! Doh! I suppose they have been aiming for the same age group for the past few decades - can't expect the magazine to grow-up with its original readership...
http://www.acetonestudio.com
And I thought the New York Times paywall was a bad idea...