Please register to gain free access to WSJ tools.
An account already exists for the email address entered.
This service is temporary unavailable due to system maintenance. Please try again later.
The username entered is already associated with
another account. Please enter a different username
The email address you have entered is already in use.
Please re-enter the email address.
Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions
As a registered user of The Wall Street Journal Online, you will be able to:
Setup and manage your portfolio
Personalize your own news page
Receive and manage newsletters
Kim Kardashian is naked on the cover of the November issue of W. It’s the magazine’s third annual Art issue. Of course having a naked reality star on the front of a publication has little to do with art–but it has everything to do with selling copies.
According to a recent story in the Wall Street Journal, U.S. magazine newsstand sales dropped 5.6 % in the first half of 2010, and total circulation was down 2.3 %.
The magazine industry has been in trouble for a number of years now, which may be one reason why we’re seeing a rash of disrobed stars on the front covers of various periodicals.
In other words, the celebrities are naked because the emperor has no clothes.
Rolling Stone recently put three of the stars of the vampire series “True Blood” on its cover–nude and spattered in blood. ESPN the Magazine, not to be outdone, put Diana Taurasi on the cover of its “Body Issue,” and did five other nude covers of other athletes to go along with Taurasi’s layout.
For the record, Taurasi plays basketball. And she doesn’t play it nude.
We should also mention that W is a fashion magazine. On W’s new cover, Kardashian isn’t wearing fashion–or much of anything.
Of course unclothed cover subjects aren’t new. Demi Moore helped boost the trend when she appeared pregnant and nude on the cover of Vanity Fair in 1991. The photo, shot by Annie Leibovitz, caused a storm of controversy at the time and some newsstands wouldn’t display the issue. Those days seem as far away as “Mad Men.” Earlier this month, Time magazine put a naked pregnant woman on its cover and the general public barely yawned.
Pictures of pregnancy aren’t enough to draw attention. Could photos of conception be far behind?
There will no doubt be more nude covers in the near future. Kardashian, or one of her sisters, are safe bets to somehow be a part of more such endeavors in the future. Many other reality stars will no doubt remove every stitch if they so much as get a call from Cat Fancy magazine. But every time a star bares all, it will likely move fewer issues than the time before. And magazines will just have to come up with another way to titillate us into purchasing their products.