Playboy magazine to no longer publish nude photos

originally posted by: Lysergic
Who got time for analog porn?

As I said, Millenials don't have the imagination to have a fantasies, they need it spoon fed to them on a screen.

originally posted by: boohoo

So I ask, how would a Steve Jobs or a Mark zuckerberg handle a room full of beautiful women, while they hung out CASUALLY, listening to musical guests and not barking orders out to staff? Pretty poorly, I'd surmise.

You really cannot compare Zuckerberg or Jobs and their reactions to the Chairman of the Board.

Sinatra was always in the limelight from his teens onward, he knew how to work those situations better.

a reply to: boohoo

How'd it ever require much imagination?


Yeah I get the "everyone who graduated after me sucks mentality." get's old though, ha get it?

So finally after all these years Hugh Hefner finally goes soft.

originally posted by: Lysergic
a reply to: boohoo
How'd it ever require much imagination?

Yeah I get the "everyone who graduated after me sucks mentality." get's old though, ha get it?

I'm not super old, I straddle the generations, so I remember much of what "came before" and yes, your answers are only further confirming all that I have said. Note, I'm not saying this is a bad business decision or that it is not a necessary step for the publication, all I'm saying is that the change in format and shift in imagery, is a reflection of the current "Male Lifestyle Fantasies" which is VERY boring when compared to the prior eras, when young men dreamed of becoming the fictional James Bond/Indiana Jones or emulating the real life of Frank Sinatra.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
You really cannot compare Zuckerberg or Jobs and their reactions to the Chairman of the Board.

Sinatra was always in the limelight from his teens onward, he knew how to work those situations better.

So, Steve Jobs was not in the limelight his whole career? My point was that Millennials "Male Lifestyle Fantasies" are to be like Jobs and/or Zuckerberg, not Sinatra, which precludes the ability to work a room full of women and other wealthy people that aren't butt kissers, gunning for CEO, Trustee, Partner or Corporate Board Member. Its really quite a boring fantasy, if you ask me. I'll ask you this, did kids of the 1980's, while watching the TV show "Different Strokes", want to be "Mr Drummond" when they grew up?

originally posted by: boohoo

So, Steve Jobs was not in the limelight his whole career?

No, not even close to the way Frank Sinatra ways. You never had girls screaming and crying when Steve Jobs showed up anywhere.

My point was that Millennials "Male Lifestyle Fantasies" are to be like Jobs and/or Zuckerberg, not Sinatra, which precludes the ability to work a room full of women and other wealthy people that aren't butt kissers, gunning for CEO, Trustee, Partner or Corporate Board Member.

Just not seeing that. There are plenty of Sinatra-esque celebrities out there that are able to work the room, have a reputation with the ladies and are not at all boring.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
Just not seeing that. There are plenty of Sinatra-esque celebrities out there that are able to work the room, have a reputation with the ladies and are not at all boring.

Yes there are, but that's not my point.

I'll ask again, did kids of the 1980's, while watching the TV show "Different Strokes", want to be "Mr Drummond" when they grew up?

Playboy has traditionally catered to Upper Middle class readers with peak circulation happening in the mid 1970's (the opposite demographic of Penthouse Magazine). So, with that in mind, do the young men in this contemporary demographic, mostly aspire, TODAY, to be more like Mark Zuckerberg or like Mark Wahlberg? Neither of us knows this answer, but I'm sure Playboy has some idea and will tailor the magazine to the untapped demographic. Since FHM, Maxim and Esquire are already effectively covering the wannabe Pharrells, Jay Z's,Mark Wahlberg and Ben Affleck's of the world, where does Playboy fit into this market, if it does not focus on the wannabe Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg's of the world?

originally posted by: boohoo

Since FHM, Maxim and Esquire are already effectively covering the wannabe Pharrells, Jay Z's,Mark Wahlberg and Ben Affleck's of the world, where does Playboy fit into this market, if it does not focus on the wannabe Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg's of the world?

I personally think it ends up looking like a cross between Maxim and GQ.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: boohoo

Since FHM, Maxim and Esquire are already effectively covering the wannabe Pharrells, Jay Z's,Mark Wahlberg and Ben Affleck's of the world, where does Playboy fit into this market, if it does not focus on the wannabe Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg's of the world?

I personally think it ends up looking like a cross between Maxim and GQ.

I guess this is where our real disagreement is, I say it will look more like Inc. Magazine or The Build Network, to capture a different market than GQ.

originally posted by: boohoo

I guess this is where our real disagreement is, I say it will look more like Inc. Magazine or The Build Network, to capture a different market than GQ.

Inc. is focused on businesses and Build is focused on mid-size companies. I do not see that as a viable marketing area for the re-envisioned Playboy. I think they need to be more of a highbrow FHM or Maxim but we can agree to disagree.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
Inc. is focused on businesses and Build is focused on mid-size companies. I do not see that as a viable marketing area for the re-envisioned Playboy. I think they need to be more of a highbrow FHM or Maxim but we can agree to disagree.

To me that's the realm of Esquires and GQ, so I don't see how a neo-Playboy can fit into that crowded space.

originally posted by: boohoo
To me that's the realm of Esquires and GQ, so I don't see how a neo-Playboy can fit in that crowded space

GQ has gotten ponderous and political so they do have an opening there and I think there is enough room for another monthly in the Esquire marketplace.

a reply to: Bluntone22

So Playboy is going to go under soon? Sounds like it. Tbh, Hugh Heffner really creeps me out. A whole universe built off photographing women who have nothing to offer the world except their bodies. It's a pretty sad scenario in my opinion. Nobody should be giving money to this guy. I'm all about naked chicks, but the whole thing is weird when you try to picture what those photo shoots are actually like. Definitely hurt some people too for the sake of jack off material. Not my thing at all plus those dudes who always had Playboy mags laying around their apartment were not the type of guys I hung out with. It's like saying "hey I jerk off a lot and I'm letting you know".

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Well I guess those people that say they read playboy for the articles can prove it now.

"Playboy Enterprises Inc., which helped usher in the sexual revolution but has stumbled in the digital era, said it no longer would publish nude photos in its flagship magazine, which built its reputation on spreads featuring pop-culture icons such as Marilyn Monroe, Farrah Fawcett and Madonna."

Maybe Hugh Hefner is going a bit senile, but he's got enough money not to care. This is an end of an era in a manner of speaking, but times change even if we don't want them to.
I wonder how much this will hurt their circulation?


www.wsj.com...

They are going for the Muslim buyers. Just going to show the ankles.

originally posted by: n00bUK
Who even buys any kind of porn these days? The internet has infinite everything of anything you will ever want.

Fortunately for everyone who wants porn for free, there are people who actually pay for it, because otherwise you wouldn't have freebie porn to look at. They don't make the effort to produce porn so you can watch it for free because they like you. All of free porn is either stolen from creators or it's sample pieces from the creators to lure you to a website to get you to pay for the full experience.

Now, there might be some kind of service like netflix or Hulu or etc for porn where alot of it can be watched for free. I wouldn't know it there was or wasn't. But aside from that.....

All of a sudden, my thirst for well-written, magazines articles just got very ho hum...

Å99

Non-nude playboy has already existed for a long time and is produced by the US Library of Congress, except its in braille. The truth is, back in its heyday Playboy was able to pay writers very well and launched a lot of sci-fi authors. For that I salute them.

But my pessimistic prediction for Playboy is that they are going non-nude and will end up having teenage, but underage models doing sexualized non-nude poses, much like fashion magazines. Then when people are desensitized to that they will throw the nudity back in with underage models and claim it was because they needed the business. I hope I'm wrong.