Now we will have to read it for the articles.

The ending of an era. Playboy is going PG.

Can't say I'll miss it, doubt I've seen an issue in 10 years.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/10/12/media/playboy-ending-fully-nude-photos/index.html

there were no fully nude pics when I first started "reading" Playboy

Better than trying to compete with the Internet, right?

GameboyRMH wrote: Better than trying to compete with the Internet, right?

That's exactly the reason mentioned in the article

Grtechguy wrote:

GameboyRMH wrote: Better than trying to compete with the Internet, right?

That's exactly the reason mentioned in the article

Ah I see. That's refreshingly honest as corporate PR goes

I haven't read one in over a decade but this still seems like we're losing something cultural.

Wait. We did buy a couple about 6 years ago to pick out the set we wanted hung on the ex's chassis. But it was just for the pictures and not the articles.

I thought Playboy had been PG for decades. Or maybe it's just that XXX got so much more X that Hugh got left behind.

I hope that cashflow will still allow them to employ and take on additional top level writers, contributors and editors. Print media has a tough go of it right now. I'm thankful that this corner has such a focused niche to keep it relatively protected. But the likes of bloggers, gawker media and other digital outlets have provided such high quantities of relative crap for content that very few even bother to seek out quality writing, and fewer writers seek to hone their craft thanks to "pay per a post" type compensation package structures. In July when I was nonfunctional, I was offered a position by a major newspaper, one of the big 5 in the states, which flattered me, and I was tempted to accept the position, but knew that it'd be months until I could fulfill the duties as required. Upon thinking about the offer more, I felt terrible about the fact that they considered my reporting and writing of a high enough level to offer me a column. No editor, not even Lieberman, deserves having to deal with 3 articles a week coming from my desk.

Much like music and fine arts, i fear that the craft of writing is dying with each generation. The sad part is that the ability to "get published", note published not viewed, is easier than ever.

wbjones wrote: there were no fully nude pics when I first started "reading" Playboy

I have said it before and I will say it again.

You're old.

captdownshift wrote: I hope that cashflow will still allow them to employ and take on additional top level writers, contributors and editors. Print media has a tough go of it right now. I'm thankful that this corner has such a focused niche to keep it relatively protected. But the likes of bloggers, gawker media and other digital outlets have provided such high quantities of relative crap for content that very few even bother to seek out quality writing, and fewer writers seek to hone their craft thanks to "pay per a post" type compensation package structures. In July when I was nonfunctional, I was offered a position by a major newspaper, one of the big 5 in the states, which flattered me, and I was tempted to accept the position, but knew that it'd be months until I could fulfill the duties as required. Upon thinking about the offer more, I felt terrible about the fact that they considered my reporting and writing of a high enough level to offer me a column. No editor, not even Lieberman, deserves having to deal with 3 articles a week coming from my desk. Much like music and fine arts, i fear that the craft of writing is dying with each generation. The sad part is that the ability to "get published", note published not viewed, is easier than ever.

I have a document where I scribble down ideas I might put into a sci-fi novel, and one of them is that the mainstream media is composed of nothing but useless fluff and real investigative journalism is basically done by hobbyists, who run their blogs pseudonymously on darknets to keep themselves out of the crosshairs of whoever they offend in the process. I let that one out of the bag because I think it's pretty close to being "expired."

Pretty interesting that once the website took away the nudity, web traffic increased significantly. And I don't think it would be because of a 18yr old web block, everyone just says "Yes I am over 18"

GameboyRMH wrote:

captdownshift wrote: I hope that cashflow will still allow them to employ and take on additional top level writers, contributors and editors. Print media has a tough go of it right now. I'm thankful that this corner has such a focused niche to keep it relatively protected. But the likes of bloggers, gawker media and other digital outlets have provided such high quantities of relative crap for content that very few even bother to seek out quality writing, and fewer writers seek to hone their craft thanks to "pay per a post" type compensation package structures. In July when I was nonfunctional, I was offered a position by a major newspaper, one of the big 5 in the states, which flattered me, and I was tempted to accept the position, but knew that it'd be months until I could fulfill the duties as required. Upon thinking about the offer more, I felt terrible about the fact that they considered my reporting and writing of a high enough level to offer me a column. No editor, not even Lieberman, deserves having to deal with 3 articles a week coming from my desk. Much like music and fine arts, i fear that the craft of writing is dying with each generation. The sad part is that the ability to "get published", note published not viewed, is easier than ever.

I have a document where I scribble down ideas I might put into a sci-fi novel, and one of them is that the mainstream media is composed of nothing but useless fluff and real investigative journalism is basically done by hobbyists, who run their blogs pseudonymously on darknets to keep themselves out of the crosshairs of whoever they offend in the process. I let that one out of the bag because I think it's pretty close to being "expired."

Yep, you are describing the present day state of affairs.

KyAllroad wrote: I haven't read one in over a decade but this still seems like we're losing something cultural. Wait. We did buy a couple about 6 years ago to pick out the set we wanted hung on the ex's chassis. But it was just for the pictures and not the articles.

I read that a few times, but now I get it.

Duke wrote: I thought *Playboy* had been PG for decades. Or maybe it's just that XXX got so much more X that Hugh got left behind.

It's never been a hard core magazine. It could never be mistaken for Gynecology Monthly. I expect it'll go back to more of what we saw in the sixties, the sort of picture you could actually hang on your wall. For Hef, it was always more of a lifestyle mag than a skin mag.

I think it's a good move. Look at what R&T did with their relaunch a couple of years back - they moved away from the typical comparison test (which is available everywhere from anyone) and started doing more long-form articles with excellent writers. It took a year or so to really settle in, but now it's clearly distinguishable from most of the other car mags. This is in reference to the magazine, the website is currently run by a clickbait editor.

In reply to Keith Tanner:

lol at the Travis comment (which couldn't be more true)

I subscribed a couple of years ago because they offered me a year for $9.95 or something. I hadn't really looked at one in years. Over time they dumbed down the content to appeal to the lack of attention span crowd--- ala Maxim. with tiny little blurbs with silly factoids.

They have kept their interviews--- which are some of the best in print, and occasionally some of the other articles are insightful. They also offer responsible, thoughtful advice in their forum--- something no porn mags do.

Playboy was always a great magazine.....that had boobs as a side benefit----- not just a crappy magazine with side-boob pictures. Sadly it appears they are following the path of the less intellectually grounded publications. Hopefully a little of what they used to be will remain.

Meh, the Playboy girls tend to be too buxom and the gynecology magazine girls (thanks Keith) tend to be too skanky so I switched to Asian fur girls with prosthetics and I’m never going back.

Joe Gearin wrote: Playboy was always a great magazine.....that had boobs as a side benefit----- not just a crappy magazine with side-boob pictures. Sadly it appears they are following the path of the less intellectually grounded publications. Hopefully a little of what they used to be will remain.

I'm hoping this is the first move in that direction. Tone down the skin and amp up what differentiates them from Maxim and online sources.

Interesting theory I just ran across - maybe part of the reason they're doing this is so they can finally offer their mags digitally on Apple devices? I'm sure it will gain them more than enough customers to make up for any they lost who bought the mag to see nudity in 2015...

RX Reven' wrote: Meh, the Playboy girls tend to be too buxom and the gynecology magazine girls (thanks Keith) tend to be too skanky so I switched to Asian fur girls with prosthetics and I’m never going back.

I literally (and I literally mean literally) lolled my E36 M3.

Joey

GameboyRMH wrote: Interesting theory I just ran across - maybe part of the reason they're doing this is so they can finally offer their mags digitally on Apple devices? I'm sure it will gain them more than enough customers to make up for any they lost who bought the mag to see nudity in 2015...

Or, quite possibly, to get the magazine into venues like grocery store checkouts which wouldn't carry the current edition of the magazine. Making it sort of a Cosmopolitan for men.

I think that in some ways, Hef was one of the most influential people of the second half of the last century.

Sure, Playboy's primary lure was the girls, but even as a twelve year old, if you could get a copy, you would end up reading it cover to cover. After all, you would keep the damn thing for a few years and a lot of that written material, some of it pretty sophisticated, would sink in and impact your thinking. And the appeal of the magazine crossed over a huge span of socioeconomic demographics.

Plus, boobies.

I think it's rather disturbing that two mostly naked men beating the hell out of each other in a ring isn't considered offensive but a naked woman in a magazine is.

Society's priorities are all berkeleyed up.

In reply to Trans_Maro:

hey now apparently women beating the hell out of each other is a thing now. (Also I don't care what the gender is, blows to the back of the head shouldn't be legal)

Flight Service wrote:

wbjones wrote: there were no fully nude pics when I first started "reading" Playboy

I have said it before and I will say it again. You're old.

and nowhere near the oldest on this forum