27 ms·
If Arianna Huffington had nude chippendales style pictures separating the Huffington Post's stories or an entourage like this one every time she was photographe
by logicallee 9y ago
If Arianna Huffington had nude chippendales style pictures separating the Huffington Post's stories or an entourage like this one every time she was photographed: http://www.gettyimages.com/event/vegas-magazine-launch-party-75190823 http://www.gettyimages.com/event/vegas-magazine-launch-party... (obviously that's not Huffington, I'm using that as an example) - would you think any less of her as a writer and editor?
Would you think it's "sleazy"?
I don't know the history of it well, but the idea that it's hard to see what's "sleazy" about a magazine like Playboy is hard to buy.
- adamnemecek 9y agoWell said.
- ehnto 9y agoWe clearly have different views on what sleaze is. Sleaze has nothing to do with sex or nudity in my mind. I could concede it could be tacky or distasteful, but even that is subjective. If Huffington had claimed to be the elegant and foremost professional news source and subsequently used nudity to sell papers then that would be sleazy. If they sold out their position of high viewership to sell advertising for cheap psuedolegal pharmaceuticals or fad diets and spin sites that would be far more sleazy. Huh. They do that. In fact when I tried to confirm the crappy advertising practices of the Huff, it popped a new tab and an alert box as I tried to leave with another advert. I know that's normally the ad providers problem but how pertinent the timing. Before it's said, yes I do realise most other news sites use similar advertising and I yet I still find the practice far more detestable than a magazine open about its love for nudity. Nobody was ever under the illusion that Playboy was anything other than what it was.