More

Wired Breasts Cover Sparks Controversy


First Posted: 11/12/10 02:20 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:10 PM ET

The latest issue of Wired magazine is sparking heated controversy because of its cover, which show a woman's breasts -- and nothing else.

The breasts, accompanied on the cover by the tagline "100% Natural," are advertising a story by Sharon Begley about a new, more "natural" form of tissue regeneration that could dramatically alter both cosmetic surgery and, possibly, lead to more serious medical breakthroughs.

But many women criticized Wired for the cover, saying the magazine was objectifying women to sell copies.

One of the most vocal critics was Cindy Royal, a technology writer. On her blog, she described her reaction upon getting the issue in her mailbox:

Boobs. Right there on the cover. A pair of breasts, no head, no rest of body... just boobs. Sure it accompanied a story on tissue re-engineering, so what other possible way might you visually represent that, but with a pair of breasts? No other possible way?

See the cover below:

Royal also criticized Wired more broadly, saying that the magazine rarely featured women on the cover unless they were in sexualized poses. "How exactly are young women supposed to feel about their role in technology by looking at your magazine?" she wrote.

Anderson actually replied in the comment section of Royal's post. He took issue with her characterization of the covers that did feature women, but acknowledging that there were not enough of them. He did, however, defend the breast cover:

"This cover story was not about tissue engineering, it was about *breast* tissue engineering. Of all the covers with cleavage out there, it's hard to find one more editorially justified than that."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST MEDIA

The latest issue of Wired magazine is sparking heated controversy because of its cover, which show a woman's breasts -- and nothing else. The breasts, accompanied on the cover by the tagline "100%...
The latest issue of Wired magazine is sparking heated controversy because of its cover, which show a woman's breasts -- and nothing else. The breasts, accompanied on the cover by the tagline "100%...
Filed by Jack Mirkinson  |  Report Corrections
 
 
  • Comments
  • 422
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (16 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ChuckDarwin
03:41 PM on 11/22/2010
Wired should've changed its name for that issue to "Underwired."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ricardo Valentin
Old belief+new evidence=new belief
09:10 PM on 11/21/2010
Maybe it is their way of keeping abreast.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Neets101
watch this space for important updates
12:49 PM on 11/18/2010
A pleasant photo of the lab technicians at work, or entering data would have sufficed.

Was that what you kids refer to as snark?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tim Moore
Afraid of clowns
11:20 PM on 11/17/2010
Next time, READ the article first, Cindy..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wisedupdude1
10:54 PM on 11/17/2010
I can't comment right now, I'm to busy looking at the cover,( Medical reseach you know.)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
GraniteSkyline
I wish you happiness!
10:42 PM on 11/17/2010
Stop the presses! A blogger no one has heard of or cares about is tossing a hissy fit!

Cindy Royal is a Royal pain in the @$$.

The cover is tasteful and will help get peoples attention focused on and important and exciting new health breakthrough.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
filiusj
Expectation is the seed of disappointment
06:34 PM on 11/17/2010
Apparently Cindy has not seen TV or a magazine rack in 30 years.
photo
MISTERUNCONVENTIONAL
The only attitude I've ever had is a bad one.
06:07 AM on 11/21/2010
Or any other rack.
05:23 PM on 11/17/2010
They are beautiful, it is done in good taste.
03:37 PM on 11/17/2010
i actually think this is a terrific cover. it illustrates the idea very well, it's eye-catching (to say the least) and original. as a woman i'm not offended in the least and i'm a bit surprised by the reaction.
photo
dmsdzinr
Progression wit a twist of sarcasm.
10:24 AM on 11/17/2010
What a GREAT Cover Idea! KUDOS to WIRED!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
weekendpartier
I need some money!
11:17 PM on 11/16/2010
Women just can't win! It's either too much breasts, or too little - it's I can be sexy but not on a magazine! My man has to be in shape and rugged, but models are too thin...sheesh, a guy just can't win!
11:08 PM on 11/16/2010
To me this is infinitely less offensive than the majority of magazine covers out there in which women (and men) are forced into clothes that aren't theres, an artificial backdrop and copious photoshopping. It's a pair of breasts, if you find this offensive I would question how big of a feminist you actually are.
photo
nermz345
floating somewhere over southern new jersey
12:40 PM on 11/17/2010
fanned and faved. i was thinking the same thing.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
GraniteSkyline
I wish you happiness!
10:43 PM on 11/17/2010
F&F
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jwb2013
REAL EYES REALIZE REAL LIES.
09:56 PM on 11/16/2010
Fruit loops! Always somebody around who has no life except to find inane excuses to be indignant over anything out side of Mr. Rogers Neighborhood, or Father Knows Best...if you know what I mean. Fruit loops...the lot of them! LMAO!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:32 PM on 11/16/2010
Ah yes the female mammal
and the mams that prove it.
I sucked on some when I was
an infant.
Very controversial indeed.
04:53 PM on 11/16/2010
Why are breasts offensive?

Killing is offensive. Breasts?