So it turns out that at least a couple of the women bloggers featured in a recent Playboy article that asked “Who’s the web’s hottest bloggers? Vote now and we’ll ask her to pose for Playboy.com!” aren’t very happy about the feedback they’re getting. In particular, they aren’t happy that Playboy says they’ll invite the winner to pose nude for the magazine, or that they are being compared to the other bloggers via a poll to determine who’s most attractive.
The problem is that Playboy is perfectly within their rights to post a poll like this (other sites like Wired have done this in the past), and it appears that everyone consented to be included anyway. Veronica Belmont says it was a bait and switch, though, in a comment to our original post: “I was also not informed that they’d be asking us to pose for Playboy if we won. They just told me that they were doing a feature on female bloggers. I guess we should have expected as much…”
Today Sarah Austin, who also originally gave Playboy permission to write about her and to use her picture, says she requested she be removed, but Playboy declined. In her email to Playboy she said “My parents found out about this feature on playboy and are not happy about it. I’d like you to remove me from the contest.” Playboy’s response: “Sadly, because of the nature of the poll that would throw off the percentage results, so we can’t do that. But we are planning to dismantle the story in a few days, so it won’t be up much longer.”
So did Playboy get the bloggers’ permission by misrepresenting exactly what they were planning on doing, or did the bloggers in question just underestimate the negative feedback they’d be getting? You decide – here’s a copy of the original email sent out to bloggers:
I’m Antonia, a senior editor at Playboy.com. I’m working on a piece that spotlights who we think are the sexiest female bloggers, and I was wondering if it would be all right if we included you in it. We can link to [your site] if you’d like, as well — and we have several million unique visitors a month, so there should be some click-through traffic. Anyway, I just wanted to make sure this was ok with you. Also, do you have a photo of yourself that we could use in the article? You can email me at **********. We’re planning to run this story at the end of next week, so hope to hear from you soon.
Yeah they got greedy, thought they would get some ad impressions.
Not sure where the problem is according to the email. They likely just to think about it and just got greedy about the increase click through rate. Like it or not, support the survey or not, they dug their grave and they’ll have to lay in it.
I think the email from Playboy was perfectly straightforward. For crying out loud its Playboy!, what the girls think they were getting into, charity? Whether they publicly admit or not, they wanted the traffic and they knew they would get it. Controversy like this is getting them even more traffic and they knew it would. Women and are evil and conniving and I’ll leave it at that.
Seems pretty straight forward, I guess hits are hits. How about Kara Swisher for Playboy? She’s pretty attractive.
Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid…guess which one Kara is..
“How about Kara Swisher for Playboy? She’s pretty attractive”… Sorry, I just threw up in my mouth a little bit!
Seems clear to me. You would have to be rather daft not to know what you were getting yourself into.
SL has seducing power…subtly, which is so sexy
We knew we would be on the site, but did not know it was a popularity contest to get naked. Some claim they didn’t know about the contest all together and that they didn’t give consent at all.
I didn’t know they would ask us to pose, but I should have figured that much. It’s playboy! I hope they remove me from the contest now, but I’m not going to cry if they don’t.
I’m not sure that someone who would consent to participating in a “sexiest female blogger” competition really has firm ground to stand on. If you’re someone who takes yourself so seriously, and you believe that the popularity of your blog is not at least partially related to how attractive you are, you should have immediately rejected their offer to be included in the poll.
How, in your view, is being offered to pose for Playboy any more objectifying that being called the “sexiest female blogger”? They’re merely offering you a reward for the contest, which you entered, which you are free to decline. Personally, I think that it’s only demeaning if you’re not confident enough to feel flattered to have been asked.
Each of the bloggers included in the poll is both attractive and, at minimum, reasonably intelligent. Each, yourself included, has relied (to various degrees) on looks as well as well a brains to attain what internet stardom they’ve attained. To say anything different would be very disingenuous.
If you don’t want to pose for Playboy, that’s totally fine, don’t do it. However, if you think you’re some kind of serious journalist, and that being called sexy would somehow damage your credibility, you should have thought about that before agreeing to participate in a stupid popularity contest.
People only pay attention to you because you’re vaguely attractive (and walking a fine line at that). Take what you can get for what it’s worth.
Even MILEY CYRUS essentially got a “when you turn 18 we’ll give you an invite”-style invitation; I wasn’t aware that invites were something you could avoid.
Playboy is free to invite whoever they want to pose and publicly announce it, and you are free to say no. It is teh getting-it-both-ways part that seems disingenuous.
Yeah, you know what they say, link love is link love, negative or positive…
If I were one of these bloggers I’d just take it as a compliment, hope to get some new readers/subscribers out of the deal, and politely decline the invite to pose for playboy at the end. What else can you do?
Just because playboy will give an invite at the end, doesn’t mean you have to accept it…Dozens of celebrities get asked every year and constantly turn down playboy. It’s a sign of popularity and public awareness of your brand…
But they should be able to pull off the names, when the candidates asked them to. No matter what.
Its not a legally binding contract to get naked, its an offer. If you don’t want to do it (which is totally fair enough) just say no! I think the email is fine. What questions did the bloggers ask or did they just blindly accept? I mean if I got an email in that vain, the first thing I would think would be spam and the second is whats the catch! Its a great lesson in life. There is no such thing as a free lunch and you all ways have to pay the piper!
Surely the reality of the matter is that playboy wouldn’t have even had to ask would they? They could have done the article/poll with out even asking. As for the bloggers wanting out of the poll, if TechCrunch does a poll on lets say the worst Corporate website and a company isn’t happy about being in that list, would TechCrunch take them out of the poll if asked? No. Same thing here. After all, the bloggers already knew they had won part of a popularity contest to be asked to be in the article, the email mentions its for the sexiest blogger. That infers that they thought that these women where sexier then other women bloggers (unless they thought that they were included as the opposite end of the scale).
Live and learn ladies, live and learn!
JMTC
Molly
Molly
I guess girls don’t know about Playboy?
Sarah Lacy – 3%!!! So funny.
Sad… an ok blogger only known for her rack gets the tiniest response on Playboy.
Sounds like implants and a diet might help.
I’d like Sarah Austin to sit and grind on my face all day.
(typical superficial / tmz response)
I’m going to go with the “they really shouldn’t be so naive” route.
First up, it’s *Playboy*. If you’re female, and approached by Playboy, you can bet it’s not your brains that are required to be on display – regardless of your involvement with tech/new media/blogging. And really, we may talk about how liberated or progressive we are (and I certainly like to) but when women (in tech, or otherwise) are *still* viewed –and validated– based on their attractiveness, I’d argue that sexism is alive and well. Hurrah!
Secondly, did no warning bells go off with the email description that states it’s “a piece that spotlights who we think are the sexiest female bloggers”? This clarifies the angle of the article: this ’sexy’ quality would have to be determined – and judged – based on appearances, not work-related achievements. Given this, did no-one think to ask Playboy –knowing, um, what sort of publication it is– what the context of the article would be, and if there would be any nudity involved at any point?
Sure, there’s some vanity involved here and certainly some greedy hopes of more traffic (but hey, we’re all guilty of that), but overall I think that this situation just highlights a certain level of naiveness. Once bitten, twice shy: here’s hoping this doesn’t come back to bite any of them on the arse.
Can we now get back to normal programming please? Ta.
Let’s be realistic. These women are hired as bloggers almost entirely for their looks, not their supposed tech knowledge, because dumbass computer geeks will click on their pics and increase traffic. Therefore, it’s entirely appropriate for Playboy to reduce them to T&A. These women are just like the vapid blond weather girls on your local news. Eye-candy, though Violet Blue wouldn’t get any hits without thrusting her chest out like that. Oh yeah, and Sarah Lacy poses sideways so her tits fill have the pic and expects us to admire her brains.
That email seems pretty vague. The girls probably assumed it was an article about sexy bloggers and not a contest on which girl you’d like to see naked. (Playboy has articles, right? That’s what all you guys claim you read it for.)
I have a little bit of sympathy because it wouldn’t have hurt Playboy to mention the naked poll in their email but they chose not to reveal that. Unfortunately, that email was just a courtesy and Playboy can run their poll without it. There really isn’t anything the girls can do about it, but I don’t think the girls are “daft” or “evil and conniving” because of their responses.
Its an email from playboy though as opposed to an email from a mag like maxim or something so you should at least think it would have something do with being naked compared to just taking daring but non-revealing photos. And besides all that, they agreed for the click throughs they knew were coming, who cares if at the end they get ASKED to pose, sounds pretty easy to decline for free clicks.
Where’s the real story, Mike? Namely, that Brigitte is in the lead and looks the type who would drop trou for PB.
I’m a female sex writer and I’ll be honest and admit that I’d LOVE the publicity something like this could produce — with or without my clothes. I’ve got a message to communicate, after all, and Playboy has a readership. What a great opportunity these women have to communicate their messages — while showing the world what everyday women (who happen to write about sex) look like!
I guess I’m confused about how sex positive a sex blogger who’s so easily put off by the idea of been seen nude really is. Are these young women… too good… for Playboy or its readers? Is their message only capable of being communicated while clothed? I’ve been working deep inside the “industry” for years and I’ve never heard of most of these ladies until now — so they’ve already benefited from Playboy’s publicity machine.
I hardly think the magazine is going to forcibly compel anyone to pose for it, so I’m not sure where the real issue here is — unless it’s got something to do with wrapping oneself in a progressive cloak of respectability while milking the dickens out of the viral marketing opportunities.
Hey, Darklady! Why don’t you learn to read? Only one of these girls is a sex blogger. Get your mind out of the promotional gutter!
Actually, all your other points are spot on — but a careful reading of precisely who each of these young ladies is explains why they might be reluctant for the publicity, even if their reluctance really says a lot about what a messed up society we have when it comes to the human body and shame…
So much better than the Twitter link bait
Aw, c’mon!
Sarah, what’s the big deal about being asked to pose nude? Is it too hard to say no? Kim Kardashian couldn’t resist, but Denise Richards managed to (the second time around).
“My parents came across it, and i want it down”, what a lame!
Yeah, Sarah should ask her dad why he’s hanging out on playboy.com!
Folks, try to put yourself in someone else’s shoes for a moment. Pretend this happened to your sister, wife, or girlfriend. Would you be so quick to casually dismiss her concerns?
If you’re normal, you’ll answer that the right way: “Of course not. I’d fight to help her every step of the way.”
@Michael E. Rubin: guess I’m abnormal then. If this ‘happened’ to my wife, I’d say “..honey, you’re hot and popular. Take it as a compliment and politely decline the offer.”
Totally agree! I would probably add comments like what did you expect and you’ll know better next time!
So what? You don’t have to pose. I wouldn’t care if someone invited them into a porn movie – just say no.
I’d kinda like to see your sister in Playboy – will she do it?
I’ve got to admit I’m typically pretty conservative in comparison to most people, but I absolutely agree with most of the people here. If my wife or my daughter were publicly asked to pose nude, I’d recommend they take it as a compliment and decline.
Coincidentally, I’ll likely be posting topless photos of my daughter on the internet in the next couple months. She’s expected to be delivered some time in October ;p
Hey, Michael, ‘fight’? Are PB journalists dragging them by their hair to a photo studio? I don’t get this. If they just respectfully decline, done.
I write a technology blog focussed on startups, venture capital, and entrepreneurship…. I wonder who my hottest readers are…. http://www.goth...te.blogspot.com
Playboy could have held the entire contest without their consent. What’s the big deal? At least their not trying to get Arrington to pose naked!
I hate who talk about parents, mothers, sisters and children – All is well guys, u mind your own work.
Happy that Michael is helpless here, and those female bloggers asking playboy just to pretend as if they didnt like this. Good political move by female bloggers, Yo to them, and booooo to lobbyists (including Arrington) who forcing those female bloggers not to do what they actually wish.
c’mon ladies…by maintaining your innocence to this whole ‘fiasco,’ you’re simply perpetuating stereotypes of women as either dim-witted broads or conniving, opportunists ala Hilary Clinton.
Guys dont pick up Playboy for its flowery, literary prose. Own up to your decision and you’ll gain more respect.
Shouldn’t Sarah feel a little hypocritical for hardly containing her laughter as she covers Wii Fit Girl today? http://pop17.co...e-wii-fit-girl/
Mike Cerm (July 16th, 2008 at 9:17 pm PDT) said it about as well as it can be said… nuff said.
I’m still waiting for my invitation to pose nude. Anyone? Anyone?
‘I’m working on a piece that spotlights who we think are the sexiest female bloggers, and I was wondering if it would be all right if we included you in it’ – that doesn’t really mention anything about polls, invites to pose naked, etc.
Definite lead on (author of the email is probably quite chuffed with himself), and in turn the girls just thought about publicity (shaking head…).
But, the girls got their publicity and they don’t have to accept the invite. There are worse things…
i’m glad veronica is doing well, strong second.
Playboy did the same thing with the Girls on TechTV. They asked everyone who was the hottest and then that one would be asked to pose for the magazine. I don’t have a clue why, if you were asked to be in an article on playboy.com, you would not think they would ask their readership which one do you like the most. We will ask the highest voted one to pose. And it is JUST asking it does not say they WILL pose, and i don’t see the problem with posing, it is a very respectable magazine that has been artistically show women for years. In fact the magazine has gotten to the point that there is almost no pictures in it, and some of the ads are most exposed then the features.
-=tbn=-
These three are not even close to winning the thing on looks, so I don’t know what the BS is about. And did Playboy actually think Sarah Lacy was sexy? Wow!
what Mike Cern and what Vernonica Belmont wrote (it was Playboy, so we should have expected that much) makes sense but I think the other position is very defendable.
I don’t think it’s ok that Playboy can ask you publicly to pose nude. It’s equivalent to claiming to the world, we at Playboy think this woman will take her clothes off for money and attention. I’m not too familiar with libel jurisprudence here in the states but I think this could happen to them. where I live in France they would get most certainly get sued.
there’s quite a difference between being attractive or sexy, and having nude pictures published somewhere. so I don’t buy the argument, you girls should have known that any relationship with Playboy is going to end up with them asking you to pose naked.
at the end of the day, some girls like posing naked, some would dream of playboy asking them to, this is great. but some don’t and deserve to be left alone.
1. I’m almost positive that Playboy didn’t have to ask for permission in the first place.
2. You honestly believe that Playboy including you in an article on sexiest female blogger isn’t going to involved a large number of men imagining you naked anyway? How is an invitation to pose nude (which you can decline) worse than that?
3. If your parents are the type who are going to be concerned about Playboy possibly asking you to pose nude, you need to explain to them why you agreed to get involved with Playboy in the first place.
Haha! Come back from E3 to this! We’re still talking about it? Anyhow, to be clear, I’m not asking to be removed. The comment I made was about it being somewhat disingenuous to not let us know that it was going to be a competition. Why bother telling us in the first place?
In other respects, it’s kind of a non-issue. I would gladly give my spot up to someone who wishes to pose, but it’s not my choice! It’s in the hands of the Playboy folks.
It’s not a competition, it’s a “poll” … they are just asking their readers which (b/v)logger they’d prefer to see nekked.
Competition would suggest the girls had some input into the selection process, by “competing”. It’s a popularity contest. And in the end, just another way to drive traffic.
I remember them doing things like this in the past.
My vague recollection is they wound up inviting all of the contestants in the end.
Playboy continues to prove their irrelevance with their juvenile attempts to gain any exposure necessary to save their dying empire. Already suffering massive market loss in their magazine business, they are desperately hoping their online site might turn things around.
Sadly, meanwhile, our culture has moved on to more perverse occupations rendering Playboy a Norman Rockwell-styled fallback to the fetishes of years gone by.
The lesson here is the same lesson everyone who’s been paying attention should have learned many years ago with Hefner’s organization: There’s no way to shake hands with the devil and not have some green slime still stuck to your palm.
Did Playboy deceive? Of course. That’s the very nature of their business: to deceive men, to twist truth, to degrade women. A more prudent and cautious person would have given pause to such an email. The fact they responded so quickly and eagerly to gain a few cheap inbound links perhaps shows how little “expertise” some of these women have on our culture, and maybe even the internet.
If they really wanted exposure, they would have written articles slamming the invite to begin with, slamming Playboy, Inc. for its cheap and tawdry methods to gain readership, and, in general, be a leader to thousands of young women by refusing to have any alliance with such an organization that helps contribute to all manner of hurt in this world. Instead, they plastered a big message on their foreheads that says, essentially, “For Sale. Price: $cheap publicity”.
The fact they got burned by the schmoozy sales tactics of “Antonia” and her little shenanigan is perhaps, almost just deserts. Not quite, but almost.
Sadly, this story isn’t over. It would hardly surprise me to see that Playboy still wins out by getting one of the women to pose. If not the “winner”, but a runner-up. Some women will do anything for attention. The fact they are bloggers probably only makes matters worse.
Whatever happened to the good ol’ days of linkbait? Am I going to have to bite off a bat’s head while wearing Speedo’s to get more blog traffic? Forget it. I’ll bow out with Jason Calacanis now if that’s the case. Andrew Keen gets more street cred with each passing day on the internet.
I voted for Natalie, just because.
Playboy has become too much of a business. The people who run the magazine now have no concept of attractiveness – Xeni is just plain weird looking, and Sarah Lacy! I think it’s almost fair to say Playboy “jumped the shark” with that choice.
Whatever. Austin was all excited about it last week and only asked to be removed when her parents found out. Did she get grounded?
Isnt Belmont built like a 12 year old boy?
It would be as creepy as Natalie Portman taking her clothes off in Hotel Chevalier.
Del Conte’s voice is annoying and she brings nothing to the table technology wise whenever they force feed here on BOL but I would definitely want her to win (plus its a magazine, so you dont get to hear her!)
Playboy wanted to do a girls of bloggin spread? Oh, I am shocked.
Get over yourselves ladies, most of your fans/stalkers have seen you naked in their fantasies a thousand times. I can guaranteed you that if these chicks weighed 220lbs, with two chins, they wouldnt get one follower on Twitter.
Dorks dont think “oh, she’s cute” in a platonic way, there s lots of lotion lovin’ fantasies that come with that kind of devotion.
Sex sells. Now youre just haggling over how much you wanna sell.
Btw, my vote goes to Leo Laporte’s hot techie, Colleen, the goth chic, who actually is a true hands on geek as opposed to the other princesses who are tech consumers and commentators.
If anyone in this blog has ever tried to do any business with Play Boy, you’ll know that this is standard fair for them.
Their people are all dodgy cheese-ball ex-strip club announcers, yet they think they’re crafty ‘entertainment’ types.
Legally, it’s one thing to say that you’re going to link to someone and can I get your approval? And then turning around and changing the context of the link-off.
Consider, Michael Arrington, I’m going to link to your blog. IS that okay with you? It’s a feature on top tech blogs.
michael approves.
Oh by the way, by top I mean top Arian tech blogs. It’s for our feature Nazi Tech Blogs Monthly.
What? you said it was okay to link to you. STop snivelling. What do you expect?