DiapermanAl Posted October 13, 2015 Share Posted October 13, 2015 What a bummer. https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/playboy-magazine-end-publishing-fully-105359379.html Link to comment
Elfy Posted October 13, 2015 Share Posted October 13, 2015 Yikes, autoplaying video! I'm not surprised because with the internet less and less people are willing to pay for porn. But I do wonder what they plan to have in there instead! Link to comment
AwakenEvil Posted October 13, 2015 Share Posted October 13, 2015 I always found their work to be more artistic than pornographic. I admit the articles in the magazine do tend to be good read but I think playboy with naked woman is a losing company. Link to comment
Dirty Diaper/Maxipad Lover Posted October 13, 2015 Share Posted October 13, 2015 I think my jaw-dropped when I saw this since it seems like some surreal bizzaro-world event. Playboy without the nudes is like GM without cars, it could work, but it just seems really odd. While people are far less willing to pay for porn than they used to be, I have to agree with AwakenEvil that Playboy always tried to take a more artistic route with their nudes that an extreme pornographic one, but they were obviously always the magazine's key selling point. While I've only seen a Playboy maybe twice in my life, the articles were actually quite good, (on par with what you might find in Rolling Stone or Vice,) but we all know that they were never really the key selling point. The only thing I can think of is that the editors want the magazine to be taken more seriously, (like Rolling Stone and Vice,) and are hoping that dropping the nudes will help them achieve that goal. Then again, this seems kind of odd when you consider that the only reason supermarket tabloids sell the way that they do is because there's a pair of tits slapped in the middle of them every Thursday. Having the nude photos in Playboy doesn't necessarily seem like it would detract from the articles, but maybe they feel differently about that, and believe they'll pick up more readers without the nudes than with them, especially since they'll probably be available in locations that might not have previously been able to carry them. Link to comment
cicilove Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 It's a gamble, you change editorial direction to meet the needs of the market and audience so your income doesn't fall into limbo.The internet claim seems a bit off honestly, their centerfold features were exactly that and not something easily reproduced just anywhere. Their attention to talent and exclusivity were key elements to their monthly draw. While they still can feature pop stars and models in lingerie it's something any of these magazines can do especially with Playboy entering that market with Link to comment
Bettypooh Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 All print media is having problems today- the internet has changed the world more drastically than anything else ever has. It's tough to find any subject matter offline that cannot be better discovered online Link to comment
wetatnight Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 I think it's a big mistake with out the nude pictures why would anybody buy the magazine anymore? Link to comment
Midwest Babygirl Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 I'm kind of surprised they were able to maintain their format for as long as they did following the digital revolution. Link to comment
willnotwill Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 Every "porn" magazine has always had their flare. Link to comment
vvp39 Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 Well, whatever you think of Playboy's decision to drop nudes, I wouldn't think it would ever sink so low as Rolling Stone, a magazine that tries to pass off fiction as fact. Link to comment
PullUpDiaperLover Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 Maybe they should try an ABDL format, no one has done that in print. I would subscribe Link to comment
messyman Posted October 17, 2015 Share Posted October 17, 2015 I think it's a big mistake with out the nude pictures why would anybody buy the magazine anymore? Link to comment
froggy Posted October 17, 2015 Share Posted October 17, 2015 Playboy used to be lots better than Penthouse or Hustler. Link to comment
smokey Posted October 17, 2015 Share Posted October 17, 2015 I used to read Playboy for the articles, cuz they didn't show any pink Link to comment
Midwest Babygirl Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Having never paid money for porn before I have heard rumors that Playboy contains "articles". Actually, getting published in Playboy used to be Link to comment
ForbiddenFruit Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Think of it this way; in the past 2 or 3 years, most people online have been linked to playboy for a well-written article at some point at least once. Next to nobody has been linked to playboy for 'a particularly good titty' in that same timeframe. Link to comment
Darkfinn Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Print media as a whole already has one foot in the grave... another decade and periodicals may very well be a thing of the past. Link to comment
Dirty Diaper/Maxipad Lover Posted October 19, 2015 Share Posted October 19, 2015 All print media is having problems today- the internet has changed the world more drastically than anything else ever has. It's tough to find any subject matter offline that cannot be better discovered online. That's honestly a severe understatement Bettypooh, physical print media is as good as dead. (Digital print media on the other hand is an entirely different story.) The widespread adoption of internet use has made it much easier to distribute information almost instantaneously with the biggest bottleneck being the actual people who create online content. An article with an error, update, or omission can be quietly corrected within seconds without anyone ever noticing the change, or with the change simply being referenced in a footnote. There's no need to print a follow up because something wasn't ready for the printing deadline, and that automatically makes physical print media archaic for any actual information. The only things that really make sense in physical printed media are materials that won't change frequently, or materials where the huge selling point is having a physical copy of something. (Think of a magazine with lots of photos or really intricate diagrams that are worth holding onto or that wouldn't be easy to view on a small digital screen.) Anything with a lot of photos typically benefits from print simply because it's possible to display richer colors on paper than on what most electronic screens can display, but printing color material in high quality costs a ton of money and is usually reserved for magazines that specifically cater to high-resolution images. You'll never see physical print completely die, but you definitely won't see it as frequently as you used too as more and more print publications are opting for digital delivery. Link to comment
wetatnight Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 the internet is killing print media Link to comment
PullUpDiaperLover Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 If they only did Diaper and Sissy stuff they would thrive! Hey, I would buy it and it would set them apart. Link to comment
dlforever68 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 Print media as a whole already has one foot in the grave... another decade and periodicals may very well be a thing of the past. I wish that would be also true for the Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now