So... no more nudity in Playboy. We'll see how long this will last.
Sauce Below
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/13/business/media/nudes-are-old-news-at-playboy.html
They should just open a chain of restaurants like hooters. That would work.To be completely honest, I doubt they'd manage to survive if they kept trying to entice people with nudes when it can be had easily online. This is at least an attempt to keep the company running by other means.
Yup. And Hooters has some dank ass wings. Totally the only reason I go there.I only read it for the articles.
I think it's pretty obvious who here has actually read an issue of Playboy in their lives, and who hasn't.
Nudity wasn't the point of Playboy for quite a long time. It's been decades since anyone bought Playboy for the photoshopped boobs, and pretty much the only reason Playboy kept the centerfold is for historical reasons and the feeling that it was expected of it. Playboy is synonymous with nudity but the ratio of nuddy wimminz to articles was always severely skewed towards text. In a typical issue there's 6 pages of (half)naked ladies, a naughty comic or two, and 150 pages of pretty much everything else.
This is a clever move, actually. Printed magazines are on their way out, Playboy is going down (not in the good way) either way, so this move is a gambit to expand their market and maybe keep afloat for a bit longer.
And look at it this way. A lack of full frontal nudity definitely didn't hurt the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition. Scant clothing and clever posing can be just as tit(HA!)illating, if not more, as nudity, and I'm sure Playboy's photographers are handy enough with strategically placed props to put even the most outrageously shameless fanservice to shame. Photos of pretty girls are still a draw with or without the postage-stamp-sized scrap of clothing that separates the R from the PG-13 rating, and you can still be incredibly cheeky (HA!) without a single nipple showing.