Of naked women and magazine sales

[tuttle300]

If the moderator will allow-- (or if she wishes she can insert this into the proper thread if she wishes) I wanted to mention something that irks me just a bit.

Now there are already two threads covering the new Stephen King story, Morality. But I wanted to mention the fact that I think it's a shame that times have changed so much that a magazine needs to have nearly nude women to sell the product. And I don't say this to be a prude either. I enjoy looking at a naked woman as much as the next guy. But it seems that there are more and more magazines resorting to this tactic.

And yes, Esquire does have a standing tradition of having attractive women on the covers (Angeline Jolie was the cover girl for Ginderbread Girl matter of fact)
But...isn't it a shame that a magazine should have to do such things just to make sales? And many magazines did this even before economic times. In fact, I find it ironic that (it seems to me) Playboy of all things, has more clothing on THEIR covers of late than many of the magazines that feature their cover girls, without clothing, these days.

Yeah, sure, I totally understand the NEED to have such covers. Though it's ironic that many of his latter stories have been (seems to me) more geared towards female readers than male readers. I mean, having the NAME Stephen King ON the cover should be (used to be) enough to ensure a "sell out" of that month's issue.

And I also understand that King himself may be looking at the paycheck or the circulation numbers and such (and in fact, he has been known to send a story or two to a magazine with very low numbers in an effort to help them along) when deciding to send off a story. (not to assume his particulars of course)

But it's so ironic (in my opinion) that Esquire chose this particular cover to attract sales (and of course, male readers) when the facts remain that there are STILL more women that read anything of literature (from good short stories in magazines to novels of any genre) than men.

Just wanted to point that out (and of course get an interesting opinion/discussion going)

[JohnDalglish]

Hi,

Absolutely true, it IS sad.

But it's also a great pic IMO

Long days and pleasant nights

[Seneca_V]

I only buy magazines when there is something in them relating to Stephen King, which is usually noted very prominently on the cover. I don't care what they put on the cover, though I will say the cover of Esquire is very creative, I'd go so far as to personally call it priceless, but I'm sure not everyone agrees with me.

It also makes me happy that SK has had so much success that a magazine goes to so much trouble to design a cover like that, I also loved the layout of The Gingerbread Girl in Esquire last year. I doubt any of the magazines he published in, in the early 70's did anything like that.

But personally a cover does not make me buy or not a magazine, same goes for books, and even DVD covers.

[Roseasharn]

I went to look at the picture.
It's really not as bad as the crap they put on the cover of Maxim. She might be completely nude, but there isn't much shown. And it is fairly arty.
Final verdict, I like it.
Also: Am I wrong, or does esquire feature naked to not quite fully clothed women frequently on their cover?

[JSinn1018]

Sex S(m)ells!

[kisun]

I can understand your point. It does seem a little superfluous a lot of the time, but then again it is a business; and that'll sell more copies.
And it sure is a nice picture. A very nice picture.

[Srbo]

Well, I`m not sure actually what is selling this issue of the magazine - the picture of Bar Refaelli ( sure, beautiful girl, but pictures like that you do see every day anywhere ) or the fact that there is a new Stephen King story in there ( which you don`t exactly read every day )...

I`d say the latter is the case.

And, with all due respect, Steve`s name on there is good enough...Bar does look better than him...

[JohnDalglish]

I can understand your point. It does seem a little superfluous a lot of the time, but then again it is a business; and that'll sell more copies.
And it sure is a nice picture. A very nice picture.

Hi,

Quite, I think I'll frame mine.

Long days and pleasant nights

[AngelZ]

The cover was tastefully done. To be honest, semi-nude covers sell better, so I don't see the harm in them.

[PatInTheHat]

Hmmm, well I'm of the thinkin', that a naked woman, stands soooo much better a chance of selling me magazines...door to door!
Over the phone, well it loses a certain something I feel...committment to the sale or belief in the product perhaps.
Then again, a midway pitchman almost has to believe in his products and is totally committed to any sale, yet a naked say, Billy May or *errrrp* Sham-Wow boy, couldn't sell me much more than a blindfold...possibly a hot, sharp, two pronged stick.
It would seem that I must be sexist a pig...oh, and I'm not dead yet!