Is this an ethical way to stage a magazine cover?

I have a problem with this, not only because of the intentional outing of Foster/Cooper, but also how the cover image was staged with "masks" of their faces.

To me, it's one thing if Newsweek or Time wants to get creative with their 5,368th cover of President Bush. He's newsworthy and there is more creative latitude there. Do a mask, caricature, whatever.

But to use images of Cooper/Foster without their permission for a non-newsworthy cover story smacks of tabloid sensationalism. I have seen issues of Out and had thought it to be a decent niche publication, but to me this is unethical.

 

That's what he wants to know

 

The reason Out magazine put Anderson Cooper and Jodie Foster on the cover is pretty easy to see....it sells magazines.
It's an unethical way to boost your numbers, but then again more and more people don't let little things like integrity get in the way of making money.
I don't see how Foster and Cooper can let this go without raising issue, if they're gay or not. Even if it's true it doesn't give the magazine the right to announce it for them. They still have SOME privacy.

 

I always thought Cooper kept his privacy because of his family. His mom is Gloria Vanderbilt as in the jeans, university and other things.
And I don't think the cover was cool. Just a way to sell more copies.

 

Do any of the people who think Cooper and Foster are entitled to their privacy think we have a right to know the name of the LSU player Pokey Chatman had a relationship with, and that the media has an obligation to find out and tell us?

 

Not necessarily. The player-coach situation makes them different.

 

I think it's pretty irresponsible but I thought it was pretty common knowledge that Cooper was gay.