Taming Down of Playboy

[Donna Tavoso]

Peggy wrote
> From the many recent articles about the "new" PLAYBOY, it would seem
> that they, too, have been considering this; whether this was a serious
> consideration, or more of a quest for publicity (it certainly did
> cause an uproar among both press and readers), remains to be seen.

I keep seeing this remarked here and I think what is important is to
understand that both Hef and Jim Kaminsky have said on several
occasions that they are not in favor of taking the nudity out of the
magazine, just that they feel that their can be different levels of
nudity shown within the magazine.  Enticing images can be shown in
many ways and while I personally don't love the Starbucks pictorial, I
think it shows their intentions clearer than most.  Sexy and sexual
images can take many forms and for a long time Playboy was only
interested if someone was willing to "show all", why not have a mix --
it makes the magazine more interesting.

The centerfolds are what makes the magazine special and unique,
changing them would be a mistakes.  I also think that Peggy is correct
when she says that it will turn off the subscibers and I don't think
we would make gains at newsstand - the biggest gains at newsstands
will come when more people come to the newsstand to buy the magazine.
The good news is that the magazine is showing a 10% increase over last
year at newsstand.

Donna