Slashdot Mirror
Playboy Is Featuring Naked Women Again -- After Dropping Nudity a Year Ago Due To the Internet (nypost.com)
mi quotes a report from New York Post: The 63-year-old legendary men's magazine is bringing back nude models in its upcoming issue -- one year after banning naked photos in an effort to boost circulation and attract more mainstream advertisers. That effort obviously has failed. One of the main reasons why Playboy dropped nudity in the first place was because the internet filled the demand. Ravi Somaiya reports in the New York Times, "For a generation of American men, reading Playboy was a cultural rite, an illicit thrill consumed by flashlight. Now every teenage boy has an internet-connected phone instead. Pornographic magazines, even those as storied as Playboy, have lost their shock value, their commercial value and their cultural relevance." The issues published under the no-nudes policy, which featured both scantily clad models and could-be naked women with strategic parts of their body covered up, will all change with the March/April issue now hitting newsstands. The issue trumpets the change with a cover headline: "Naked is normal."
Has anyone here ever actually paid for porn?
I used to admin (on a retainer, they called when they needed something) the bookkeeping system for a adult store chain. in the early 90's they booked over 2 million net profit per month. In 99 when I stopped, it was less than 300K. Company was sold off and it is now owned by a company whose name you know if I said it, and appears to be making profits again. I dunna know.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
I worked at a 4 location local video store chain in the early 1990s. Our location was one of the two locations that had porn titles.
We used to run reports near close and there were some nights where we made 80% of our revenue on porn movies. 75% of that gay porn.
At this store, the actual tapes were shelved behind the counter and an empty box with a hunk of foam inside was on the shelf. You brought the box, we put the tape in a plastic VHS carry case when you rented it.
The porn room was a separate room in the back of the store, but the whole empty box selection routine worked the same. But the porn boxes were probably 50% larger in area than the regular titles, but people would always walk out of there and grab the FIRST title they could reach (the A section of drama) in some vain attempt to cover the box, which of course it never did. And they would do it when no one else was in the store, too -- like, umm, I have to read the title to give you the actual videotape to take home. No secrets here.
One night I moved the tiny self-help & how-to section to where drama was supposed to start because I figured nobody rented them anyway, and if the nervous porn hounds were going to just grab random titles they might as well not decimate the As out of the drama section.
The biggest hoots were when we people whose name you recognized -- or people you knew! -- came in for porn, especially gay porn.
Well, unlike with Obama, Trump no longer feel the need to placate muslim morals and teachings, and force women to cover up like a big sock puppet with eye holes.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
playboy is more of a brand than anything nowadays.
also playboy does some non-nude variations internationally already.
the thai version is non-nude for example.. and they got a thai tv channel thats non-nude too.
this new "we'll have nudes but they're not going to be 100% sexual but just natural" thing sounds like a disaster though.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
What? A living wage is an easily definable concept: a wage at which people workign full time with said wage can maintain a normal standard of living, that is, afford housing, food, electricity, and so on. :
The plural of anecdote is not evidence. I'm glad your son has gotten employed, but keep in mind that wallmart's abuses towards their workforce are such that they even have their own wiki article'
As this article well puts it:
Etc. So they're paying a below livable wage and then making their employees use benefits to try and survive. They're essentially subsidizing a large part of their labor costs with tax-money because what they're paying people is not enough to live on in many areas.
I totally disagree that this is 'taking care' of their employees. It's blatant abuse, of both the employees themselves as well as tax-payer money that has to be spent on their employees on account of them not paying a livable wage or offering proper health care.
"It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead