Comments on: Are you kidding me? Really, Hustler?

By: Windsor Grace

Windsor Grace — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 15:11:20 +0000

I agree with the both of you about this possibly being a publicity stunt and she should have been rescued. The truth is, she wasn’t and even if this is a publicity stunt, Hustler’s actions are deplorable. Blue Herring or not, it’s disgusting.

By: Jvstice

Jvstice — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 07:12:33 +0000

and just because they wanted the ‘sexual in nature’ photos ABSOLUTELY means they won’t do an article about them ?!?!

By: mamatulip

mamatulip — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:33:41 +0000

HOLY SHIT.

That is wrong on so many levels. I don’t even know where to BEGIN.

By: Wolfscratch

Wolfscratch — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:59:51 +0000

Jvstice, excellent comment.

The Crime Scene Photos Focus is a Blue Herring.

Meredith Hope Emerson should have been rescued..

Representatives Ralston and Chambers are creating a diversion to deflect from the truth..

Seems to be working. The overwhelming responce is outrage.
Google search: Emerson – Hilton: 3, 260, 000 Links

Wolfscratch: Glenn Adams

By: ifbyyes

ifbyyes — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 02:44:59 +0000

Or their readers!

By: Windsor Grace

Windsor Grace — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 01:24:17 +0000

They said they want the photos because they are sexual in nature. Why else would a sex mag want naked photos that reputable publications wouldn’t?

Sent from my iPhone

By: Jvstice

Jvstice — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:29:27 +0000

They couldn’t possibly be wanting to do an article on a murdered model could they? Seems you’re all jumping to the conclusion that just because it is Hustler they want to portray the photos as sexual….seems like an awful big assumption there. After all there are articles with words in the mag as well as girlie photos. There just might (however small) be an opportunity there for actual journalism.
I once worked at Kinko’s when a woman came in with a bunch of pro-life things to copy…nobody else would do the job. I mentioned it to the woman when she picked them up, they were props for a pro-choice movie. Just goes to say never assume…….

By: Windsor Grace

Windsor Grace — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:12:13 +0000

You would think. But, because the state owns them, they are public record. And there by, under the first amendment, Hustler has the “right” to have access.

By: Nilsa @ SoMi Speaks

Nilsa @ SoMi Speaks — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:04:49 +0000

What strikes me here is this … the photos may be public, but they are owned by someone. Not Hustler. Whether it’s the photographer or the state or whatever, those photos are owned by someone other than Hustler. And unless Hustler gets permission to reprint them, you’d think they shouldn’t be able to include them in their magazine at all.

By: donna

donna — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:12:45 +0000

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. It is disgusting that a magazine would want these photos.