British tabloids pressured to dump Page 3 topless photo feature

From today's New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/19/world/europe/19iht-letter19.html?_r=0

THE FEMALE FACTOR
British Tabloids Face Pressure Over Page 3
By AMELIA GENTLEMAN
Published: December 18, 2012

LONDON — Lucy Holmes finally lost patience with Britain’s best-selling newspaper, The Sun, when she bought it to read about the Olympics last summer and discovered that the biggest picture of a woman inside was not a triumphant athlete but a young model wearing just her underpants, captioned “Emily from Warrington.”

Suddenly enraged by something that has been a constant feature of British life since 1970, she created the No More Page 3 campaign, dedicated to persuading The Sun to drop the topless images of young women on Page 3.

Francine Hoenderkamp decided to set up Turn Your Back on Page 3, another protest group, when she grew weary of her boyfriend ogling The Sun’s models and suggesting that she have plastic surgery on her breasts. Earlier this year, she submitted evidence on sexism in media to the Leveson inquiry into the conduct of the British press.

Ms. Holmes finds it hard to explain why bare breasts are still integral to The Sun, which is bought by 2.7 million people every day, remarking with genuine bemusement: “Boobs are not news.”

“Men don’t actually need to see young women’s nipples in order to learn about the news. Every man I’ve ever met has managed to get through The Six O’Clock News without them. And really if there was a desperate need for a nipple, well... we have the Internet now,” she argues on her campaign blog. “Page 3 has created a ‘Cor, look at the tits on that’ culture that I think is really problematic.”

Ms. Holmes says she is “not versed in feminist campaigning,” but for the past four months, she has all but abandoned her previous work as an actor and writer, pouring her energy instead into composing passionate letters and video appeals to The Sun’s editor, Dominic Mohan, attempting to persuade him that it is time to stop publishing topless images. She has had no reply but is gathering much support from elsewhere, and she now has more than 61,000 petition signatures.

She may consider herself lucky to have had no response. Previous campaigners against Page 3 have been subjected to sharp attacks from the tabloid. When the British politician Clare Short spoke out against it in the 1980s, she was described by The Sun as “fat,” “ugly” and “jealous of beautiful women.” When another senior Labour politician, Harriet Harman, proposed legislation to ban Page 3 in 2010, she was dismissed by the paper as a “harridan” and a “feminist fanatic.”

But there is a new energy in the campaign against Page 3 in Britain.

Partly this stems from growing impatience with the way women are portrayed in the media. A recent Women in Journalism study revealed that pictures of the Duchess of Cambridge and her sister Pippa Middleton were among the most regular images of women on British front pages, that 78 percent of all front-page articles were written by men, and 84 percent of front-page articles were mainly about men.

Partly it is fueled by a sense that Page 3 is an embarrassing anachronism, a throwback to an era of lewd seaside postcards, a time when the leering comedian Benny Hill was considered funny, a time when the endlessly popular “Carry On” film series thrived on contriving to make its female stars fall out of their bikinis and were celebrated indulgently as a core part of British culture, a time when there was much confusion over what was innocent, tongue-in-cheek sauciness and what was crude misogyny. The appeal of that genre is rapidly fading amid the soul-searching under way in Britain over the Jimmy Savile scandal (the late BBC host who is suspected of having sexually accosted or abused as many as 450 people, mainly girls) and the sense that people have turned a blind eye to everyday sleaze in the media for too long.

Lord Justice Sir Brian Leveson concluded that the future of Page 3 was beyond the remit of his report but appeared sympathetic to the campaigners’ arguments. “Some Page 3 tabloids apply a demeaning and sexualizing lens beyond those who choose to appear in their pages with breasts exposed: Even the most accomplished and professional women are reduced to the sum of their body parts,” his report states.

Mr. Mohan made a “spirited defense” of Page 3 during the inquiry, describing it as “neither harmful nor offensive.” Others, Sir Brian notes, “argue that Page 3 is simply an anomaly: out of place in the 21st century where a woman is just as likely as a man to purchase (or edit) a tabloid newspaper, or lead the country.” Sidestepping a debate over whether a free press should be “entitled to be tasteless and indecent,” he concluded that any new regulator of the British press should have the power to accept complaints from women’s groups (rather than being instructed only to respond to complaints from individuals).

Ms. Hoenderkamp, of Turn Your Back on Page 3, was delighted by Sir Brian’s attention to the issue. “I thought we were going to be ignored,” she said.

But Ms. Holmes was disappointed that his conclusions were not more strident on this issue. She is trying to take heart from recent developments in Germany, where on International Women’s Day this year, the country’s biggest-selling newspaper Bild, stopped publishing topless models on the front page.

Meanwhile, she has a proposal for Mr. Mohan. “If you really want to celebrate the wonder and beauty of breasts, you should print a daily picture of a woman breast-feeding,” she suggests.

Amelia Gentleman is a journalist with The Guardian. Katrin Bennhold is on sabbatical leave.
 
Stopping young ladies from earning a living in this manner, by choosing to do what they want with their bodies.... wouldn't that be a backwards step for feminism? To take this right away from women, many of whom use Page 3 as a launchpad to launch lucrative lads mag/calendar careers in which they earn lots of cash, enjoy their lives, travel to exotic locations for photo shoots and from what I gather make close, in some cases lifelong friendships? Some of whom admit they don't have a clue they would be doing otherwise? Some of whom use the money they make from Page 3 to fund their education?

Fucking moron.
 
I think the first ones I stroked it to were Danni Wheeler, Lisa Bangert, Belinda Charlton and OF COURSE Jo Guest. Virtually from the moment I could stroke it until the day I die, Jo Guest.
 

Rey C.

Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
The Page 3 girls are some of the more interesting things about British tabloids. To me, it's kind of funny how that quirky feature has survived for so long. Don't fold to the pressure to be PC. If some people don't like that feature, then don't buy the paper. Why is this so hard for people? Once NewsCorp scooped up Dow Jones, I eventually got tired of the editorial pages in the paper that I've read for most of my adult life: The Wall Street Journal. I started getting Investor's Business Daily instead. No campaigns. No boycotts. Just vote with your wallet. Hard? No.
 

Big Poppa Pump

- My Name Is My Name -
Maybe eye candy and news just go hand in hand in this country. We have a tv channel called Sky Sports News which is kind of like Sportscenter but with hot women reading the sports news. Some of them I doubt were brought in for their sports knowledge :D
 

luis1972

Proxima Centauri b
I see no problem.
Newspapers must auto regulate, maybe a warning about nudity, or restricted the sales.
 
Maybe move from Page 3 to Page 1? Back in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the short period when we had a real democracy with freedom of speech in Brazil, most newspapers and magazines put topless girls in the cover.
 
That is all part of a deliberate strategy by online mega-businesses. Just connect the dots here.
Facebook is very conservative, and is getting harder to go around their blocks and filters. These days, to post a bikini pic can get a girl's profile banned over there.
Google changed their algorithms so now has became pretty hard to find porn over Google. All you can find are outdated forum posts and blogs (2010 maximum) and paid websites. Google is not indexing free porn sites anymore. Actually, it is taking them out of pagerank.
So, meanwhile, an unsuspected startup in California is launching a revolutionary virtual reality technology that will make 3d totally immersible virtual sex available, for a small subscription fee, by the end of 2013. (Google Sinful Robot).

What they want is to block all access to porn, naked women, whatever in general. That is called the "lollipop strategy". People didn't have the access we have to porn and naked hot women, before http was enabled in the middle 1990s. And high quality free porn became a reality in the beginning of the 2000s, when DSLs became readily available in the United States. So, for like almost 20 years people have been watching porn 24/7 from the Internet. They got addicted and they know that is good.
So, big Internet companies go ahead and take porn from people. They all become crazy, rapes become pandemic. People start to get crazy because they will have no access to porn anymore.
Then Google, Facebook and Apple step in like saviors, and offer this new virtual reality totally immersible 3d sex experience, and everyone flocks like mad-sheep to get a subscription of that thing and immerse themselves in the new world of sex.

That is the way it is, folks. No one gets rich for being a good and nice guy. Psychology tells us that every one that is able to sell anything is at least a little bit like a mass murder maniac sociopath inside their subconscious mind.
So, it is all business. Page 3 is going to disappear, free porn will disappear, so Google, Facebook and Apple can sell their new virtual reality Internet to the world.
 

GodsEmbryo

Closed Account
Ms. Holmes finds it hard to explain why bare breasts are still integral to The Sun, which is bought by 2.7 million people every day, remarking with genuine bemusement: “Boobs are not news.”

When I think about the UK, the page 3-girls and paparazzi, comes to mind. It seems OK to have ENTIRE magazines filled with all kind of mud stories and pictures that paparazzi can dig up about celebrities and without permission from the celebrities. And it's not OK to have a page in a tabloid off a girl who wants to be on that page? 'Filth' is in the eye of the beholder I guess. And what else would you read waiting at the hairdresser...

Francine Hoenderkamp decided to set up Turn Your Back on Page 3, another protest group, when she grew weary of her boyfriend ogling The Sun’s models and suggesting that she have plastic surgery on her breasts

:facepalm: Why not get rid of the entire female population on Earth? Men will ogle women whether it's in a tabloid or on the streets.
 
Sophie Howard, Lucy Pinder, and Jordan.


When I think about the UK, the page 3-girls and paparazzi, comes to mind. It seems OK to have ENTIRE magazines filled with all kind of mud stories and pictures that paparazzi can dig up about celebrities and without permission from the celebrities. And it's not OK to have a page in a tabloid off a girl who wants to be on that page? 'Filth' is in the eye of the beholder I guess. And what else would you read waiting at the hairdresser...



:facepalm: Why not get rid of the entire female population on Earth? Men will ogle women whether it's in a tabloid or on the streets.

:goodpost:
 
Top