SI Readers Cancel Subscriptions En Masse Over 'Ghetto' Swimsuit Issue

Beyonce is beautiful and belongs in SI for her nice body. Kanye shouldn't be in it but I don't have a problem with him being in it. It is time for this country to be less sensitive and more responsible.

 

MediaTakeOut.com has learned that Sports Illustrated is facing a backlash over its new Swimsuit Edition. According to reports, a number of models are privately upset that Beyonce, a singer, was chosen as this year's cover girl.

And the tension appears to be growing. An insider at a prominent New York modeling agency told MediaTakeOut.com exactly how she felt about the decision. She explained, "The cover spot is supposed to go to the top model in the industry. This year it went Beyonce. It's an insult ... There isn't a model alive that doesn’t find [Sports Illustrated's] choice offensive."

And it's not just angry supermodels that the magazine has to contend with. Some Sports Illustrated readers are also upset with the new issue. But these readers aren't just upset with Beyonce - they're upset with the number of Black artists featured in the magazine. The new issue, which also features Kanye West and Cee-Lo from Gnarls Barkley, is being referred to on sports message boards as the "Ghetto issue."

And those angry readers are taking their complaints directly to the magazine. Tells one magazine employee, "The calls are nonstop ... ”

So far Sports Illustrated has refused to comment on this brewing controversy.

Developing...

 

Oh, well that post was just full of facts and credible sources.

 

Exactly. It's just seeping with credibility.

There's only one problem D_B....that wasn't the "backlash" from your original post. Your original post was a problem with it being a "ghetto" issue. And if a modeling agency is pissed at SI for not using a model, you really think the editors are going to give a swut? It's not like models are their target demographic.

 

Maybe SI was counting on a backlash for extra publicity and when that didn't materialize, they are playing the 'ghetto cancellation' angle.

 

Hey, idiot? SI isn't playing anything. You see any quotes from anyone at SI who doesn't work in the mailroom?

 

Or maybe SI is trying to divert attention away from the fact that they found the weapons of mass destruction that Bush failed to find. As it turns out, they were hiding in Steve Rushin's bottom drawer of his desk.

According to a mail room source....

 

The real problem with this year's issue?
A serious decline in nipple shots.
Remember the good old days, when Cheryl Tiegs, Elle Macpherson or Paulina Porizkova would wear a fishnet or wet, white suit for the benefit of horny teenage boys unable to get their hands on a Playboy? Other than the body painting shots -- which don't count anyway, since the nipples are, at best, vague outlines -- I didn't see a single nipple or areola in this year's issue. It's a trend that's been continuing for several years now, and I'll stand for it no longer.
Who will join me in the streets outside the Time Life building shouting "No nipples, no subscribers!"? If nothing else, do it for the kids, dammit!

 

Yes, the 42 million swimsuit hits on the website that first week were deemed insufficient, so SI marketing began leaking disinformation to blogs and conspiracy theorists. Which, like single men who live in their parent's basement and the morbidly dull, are groups with considerable overlap.

Shhhhh. I have to scoot back to the mailroom before that infrared surveillance coffeemaker rats me out. Developing....

 

Well, an anonymous source with ACTUAL information and insight is OK ... but a mailroom worker and a local journalist. Chalk sources, they are, I'm sure.

 

The nipples are pretty 'out there' in some of the body painting outtakes, IMO

 

d_b, for all the crap you spew, you do get points for having Lee Ermey in your sidesaddle.