Thursday, November 20, 2008

Sexuality Expert Index to Mr. Media Interviews

Bookmark and Share

The
Mr. Media
Interviews

By Bob Andelman


Subscribe to Mr. Media in iTunes!


SEXUALITY EXPERT INTERVIEWS

Kelli McCarty
adult film star, “Faithless”; soap opera star, “Passions”


Rory Freedman and Kim Barnouin
Skinny Bitch book series


<Chip Rowe
Dear Playboy Advisor: Questions from Men and Women to the Advice Column of Playboy Magazine


Jenny Block
Open: Love, Sex, and Life in an Open Marriage


Robbie Lee,
The Straight Man's Pocket Guide To Picking Up A Hottie-Written by a Woman Who Loves Women


Brian Alexander
America Unzipped


Jim McBride
Mr. Skin


Stacy Collins and Breann McGregor
Playboy Special Editions


Chris Napolitano
Playboy


Chip Rowe
Playboy Advisor


Heather Findlay
Girlfriends


Jonathan Riggs
Prism Comics: Your Guide to LGBT Comics, Instinct Magazine






[Get Copyright Permissions]Copyright 2008 Bob Andelman. Click here for copyright permissions!





Subscribe to Mr. Media's RSS/XML Feed


Get MR. MEDIA Interviews delivered by email! Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner





Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Labels: , , , , ,

Saturday, May 10, 2008

Legs McNeil, PLEASE KILL ME, THE OTHER HOLLYWOOD author: Mr. Media Audio Interview

Bookmark and Share
Book cover of Book cover via AmazonWhen Spin magazine started, its staff included two fascinating characters. First was Bob Guccione, Jr., the magazine’s founder and namesake son of the publisher of Penthouse.

And then there was Spin’s senior editor, Legs McNeil.

Legs McNeil!?!

What the hell kind of stupid name was that for a journalist? I mean, I grew up with kids named "Plinky," "Jiggs," and "Doine," but "Legs"?

Well, let me tell you, that guy Legs McNeil could write. Some months, the only copy worth reading in Spin was under his byline.

It wasn’t until years later that I learned that in the early 1970s, McNeil was a co-founder, with John Holmstrom and Ged Dunn, of Punk Magazine, which gave name to an entire musical generation.

McNeil has since written two remarkable non-fiction books, Please Kill Me: The Uncensored Oral History of Punk, and The Other Hollywood: The Uncensored Oral History of the Porn Film Industry He’s also involved in a new documentary series unspooling across VH1, Spike, and the Sundance Channel in May called "SEX: The Revolution."

Because of the nature of these topics, if you’re easily offended – or under 18 - stop listening now. Thank you.

You can LISTEN to this interview by clicking the BlogTalkRadio.com audio player below!

open separate window



© 2008 by Bob Andelman. All rights reserved.








Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, March 27, 2008

Best. Magazine. Cover. Ever.

Bookmark and Share
I was passing by a newsstand in Manhattan's Penn Station earlier this week and I saw this magazine cover. "WTF?" I went back and looked again. Then I laughed and laughed. This is a magazine on a roll! If you saw the nude Lindsay Lohan cover a few weeks earlier and inside spread, you know what Mr. Media means. But if not, check out this 2008 cover gallery.










© 2008 by Bob Andelman. All rights reserved.


Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, March 01, 2008

Brian Alexander, "America Unzipped" author and MSNBC.com columnist: Mr. Media Interview, Part 1

Bookmark and Share
Sex, sex, sex.

Seems like that’s all there is on the Internet some days. Well, this is one of those days, my friends. My guest today is Brian Alexander, author of America Unzipped: In Search of Sex and Satisfaction.

Brian also writes the “Sexploration” column on msnbc.com.

You can LISTEN to this interview by clicking the BlogTalkRadio.com audio player below!

Click to open separate window



BOB ANDELMAN/Mr. MEDIA: We’re delighted to have you here. Any day we can talk about sex and get away with it is a good day.

ALEXANDER: It’s a career choice.

ANDELMAN: For one of us it seems to be. Now, you’re probably sick and tired of talking about sex, but since you’ve written a book called America Unzipped, that’s just going to be too bad today.

ALEXANDER: That just goes with the territory.

ANDELMAN: I’m afraid so. I’m afraid so. One of my revelations from reading your book is that you’re an odd choice for a guy to write about sex.

ALEXANDER: Well, I do have it.

ANDELMAN: Not to say that you don’t, of course.

ALEXANDER: Look, I think people everywhere are extremely curious about sexuality, but I don’t think you have to be sort of a fringy, edgy, sexual explorer in order to be curious about all kinds of different sexual practices. In fact, I think if you’re going to be addressing a mainstream audience, it may help if you come as a form of ambassador to be able to explore worlds that some people may have fantasized about but may not have experienced firsthand. And as the book goes into, many, many more Americans like me, average folks, are out there experimenting.











ANDELMAN: I want to explain to folks listening why I would say that you’re an unlikely choice. I don’t know what you look like. You could be a very attractive man. You could be an unattractive guy. I have no idea. I say that because, from reading the book, I get the distinct feeling that there’s still a lot of Catholic guilt at work on you.

ALEXANDER: I was raised Catholic, and though I don’t consider myself a church-going Catholic any longer, there’s no escaping. I don’t think any person raised Catholic would tell you they ever escape their upbringing.

ANDELMAN: I’m Jewish so I’ve certainly heard a lot about Catholic guilt and certainly I have a mother so I have plenty of Jewish guilt, but how does Catholic guilt apply to the arena of sexuality?

ALEXANDER: It’s basically per its teaching. From the very beginning, we are taught the story of the Virgin Mary, who died pure, theoretically, who never knew man, as the saying goes. The church fathers, and I actually discuss a little bit of this in America Unzipped, the church fathers had a very disjointed view of human sexuality. They did not really approve of it. In fact, they thought that sex, at best, was a necessary evil and only to be done within the context of marriage and only to be done for the act of procreation, although some said that it would be better if everybody abstained from sex because if everybody abstained from sex, we would be purer people, and there would be no more children, and we would hasten the end of the world and therefore, the second coming.

ANDELMAN: That’s a frightening thought.

ALEXANDER: It is a little bit of a frightening thought. And that’s gone down through a couple thousand years so I think that there’s a great cultural weight that people deal with. And it’s not just Catholics. It’s people from many different religions.

ANDELMAN: Right, but I’m dealing with the guy who wrote the book who is Catholic. In the book, you come back to that guilt periodically, and a couple times, you actually ask other people, “Don’t you feel guilty about that?” So I thought that was very interesting. It was not what I was expecting.

ALEXANDER: I think there’s a great throwing off of guilt. One of the points of writing the book was to discuss why we seem to be living in such a hypersexual culture while, at the same time, we have been undergoing what many people say is a new great awakening, a rise of Christian fundamentalism, which is not typically known as being pro-sex.

ANDELMAN: I suspect people who are tuning into this don’t want to hear about guilt. They want to hear about sex.

ALEXANDER: The two often go hand in hand, don’t they?

ANDELMAN: Do you feel any less guilty about your work in the sex field having completed the book?

ALEXANDER: I never really felt guilty about my work in the field. Any sort of guilt or sense of taboo that I have felt personally is really restricted to me, personally. My opinion about what people may or may not do in their own sex lives generally is somewhat libertarian, and that is that if you’re a grown-up and you are dealing with people who are agreeing to whatever it is you happen to be doing, then pretty much more power to you. Whether or not I want to necessarily engage in that is another story.

ANDELMAN: One of the chapters in the book is about a guy named Joe Beam from Family Dynamics. He seems to have more of a libertarian view toward sex as long as it’s in the context of marriage.

ALEXANDER: That’s right. It’s very interesting. In researching the book, I found that within at least some forms of Christian fundamentalism, by which I mean sort of Bible-based Christianity, there is a somewhat healthier view of sexuality than those people are generally given credit for. Joe’s opinion, and it’s the opinion, really is a mainstream opinion, within evangelical Christianity, is that if you are heterosexual and married, there’s really very little that you’re not supposed to be able to do. He has what he calls the 10 Biblical Prohibitions, and the prohibitions are things that you might expect. Don’t have sex with your mom, for example.

ANDELMAN: Oh, is that on the list?

ALEXANDER: That’s on the list. That’s on the list.

ANDELMAN: Oh, good. I’m glad I didn’t violate that before I found out about that.

ALEXANDER: It’s interesting. This is a sort of 30-year process that evangelical Christianity has gone through. They look at the sexual revolution of the late ‘60 and early ‘70s and said, “How do we address this? What do we tell people? Because our followers have new questions that they didn’t have before, so what do we do about this?” And they wrestled with it, and some people like Joe Beam have come up with this kind of laissez-faire within straight marriage philosophy.

ANDELMAN: Is he the exception to the rule? I’m guessing that he is because you highlight him, that if more people felt like him he wouldn’t stand out so much.

ALEXANDER: It’s surprising. He’s not necessarily the exception to the rule. He’s emblematic of a strain of thought. Tim LaHaye, for example, who wrote all the Left Behind books and is known to be somewhat of a firebrand Christian, also wrote Christian sex self-help books with his wife, Beverly LaHaye, who is an ardent religious-right political activist. This has been going on now for a little while. James Dobson, who’s the head of Focus on the Family and is certainly not a liberal by any wild stretch of the imagination, has talked about the naturalness of masturbation, for example. Boys should not feel guilty about that. So it’s not quite as black and white as you might think.

ANDELMAN: Tell us a little bit more about the book. Each chapter is devoted to a different exploration that you made, and I don’t mean that in one chapter, you have a three-way, and the next chapter, you…For people who haven’t seen the book, it’s not that kind of book. Tell us a little bit about the book, a little bit about how it’s set up and how you went about researching.

ALEXANDER: The genus of the book came about after I became the “Sexploration” or sex columnist for msnbc.com, and I was getting tons of emails from people asking questions about everything. Some of the stuff I hadn’t even heard of, and the biggest question people had, really what it came down to the question of, “Am I normal?” They were made to feel, either by our culture or society or themselves or their upbringing, that somehow, whatever it is they were asking a question about, was somehow not normal. And yet, at the same time, we were having this big freak-out over Janet Jackson’s breast at halftime of the Super Bowl. So how could these two things be happening at the same time? I thought the only way to go out and really sort of learn more about this is to go into the country and talk to people because people would rather eat dirt than ask a doctor about their sex life or respond to a phone call. I wanted to go where people would go who had sexual questions.











For example, I worked in an adult superstore selling sex toys and pornography and lingerie to people, and I chatted them up and asked them about their attitudes and about their sex lives. And I found that, across the board, they are you and me and our neighbors and our parents and our friends and co-workers. The inhabitants of a sex store in this day and age are not the sort of saddled guy in the raincoat, by any means. I wanted to hear the voices of people who were sexually exploring because I don’t think those voices get heard. And the book is a lot of fun. It’s not everyday, as a reporter, I get to interview a six-foot tall pink rabbit, a guy dressed in a rabbit/bunny costume who was a what’s known as a “furry” at a fetish convention. There’s lots of funny stuff in there, and I hope people enjoy the read, but underneath all that, there is this idea that we really are out there exploring much more than we are given credit for. And I go into why I think that is and what that says about our culture.

ANDELMAN: I think the interview that I enjoyed the most was actually early on, it was you talking to the woman who was selling the love swings. You’re trying to listen to her, and what she’s talking about is quite sexual and quite interesting, but you can’t keep your eyes off the video behind you and trying to figure out how exactly they did that.

ALEXANDER: Right. Seriously, these love swings can be very complicated. And as a guy who is not the best with power tools, I’m thinking, “How did they get the love swing up into the ceiling and account for the weight and all that sort of stuff? It requires a fair amount of intricate carpentry work to get that up there.” And that woman, by the way, is -- so people who haven’t read the book know -- a very sort of sweet, very nice lady, a mom who lives in North Carolina and is a church-going Christian who believes that Jesus is her Lord and Savior, and she makes videos, instructional videos, for the Sinclair Institute, which is advertised everywhere. And they are very explicit videos about how to have different kinds of sex.

ANDELMAN: That’s the “Better Sex” series, right?

ALEXANDER: That’s right.

ANDELMAN: You see those everywhere. They’re very clever, too, because they have a different type of ad for every type of place that they want to run it as opposed to some would have one ad, and they try to squeeze it in and put a round peg in a square hole kind of thing.

ALEXANDER: Right. It’s going to be a little bit racier in the sports section and a little bit more sort of highbrow in Atlantic Monthly.

ANDELMAN: We would hope. You did this research for the book a little differently than Kinsey or Hite. It’s really a very experiential kind of book, isn’t it?

ALEXANDER: This is not science, although it’s sometimes filed under the Sociology section. I’m not really sure it’s sociology either. It really is listening to people and not collecting data. So, for example, I’ve been asked the question do most people do this or that thing? And the fact is I don’t know if most people do. My argument in the book is that the stuff that’s in the book can now be really considered mainstream. Whether or not 51 percent or more of the people do it isn’t so important to me as whether or not it has gained broad acceptance in our society, and it has.

ANDELMAN: You mentioned before about working in a store. I think it was Fascinations in Tempe, Arizona.

ALEXANDER: That’s right.

ANDELMAN: How long did you actually work in the store?

ALEXANDER: About a week.

ANDELMAN: So you gave it the full experience.

ALEXANDER: Oh, yes. I went through the employee training and sort of became an apprentice salesman, and then I made something of a specialty out of selling lubrication. I figured if I was going to be there for a short amount of time like a week, I better at least get to know at least one product very well if I was going to hope to sell any of it. And I did pretty well selling it, and I became quite the good lube salesman.

ANDELMAN: You were the guy who figured out that, I think, that if you caught them on their way out…

ALEXANDER: That’s right.

ANDELMAN: …you hit them with the lube, right, and you put a little bit on them, and yeah.

ALEXANDER: Yeah.

ANDELMAN: Is there much touching in these stores? In some stores you go to, if you’re buying a stereo, a guy might put his hand on your shoulder as he’s pointing out things to you. Is there any touching in these stores?

ALEXANDER: Between the workers and the customers? No, there’s not a lot of touching at all. There might be some touching among the customers, but there is touching of, in this new form of sex shop, the products. We were encouraged as employees to take vibrators out of their packages, put batteries in, and let a woman handle it and feel it and touch it so she knows what she’s getting into. It’s really much, much more customer-friendly than it used to be. These stores are really aimed at suburban, middle-class, upper-middle class people who are not sneaking into a store anymore. They are big, they’re well-lit, they’re clean, they’re friendly. They’re not at all intimidating like they used to be.

ANDELMAN: Do people go to these stores to meet other people at this point, or is it pretty much you’ve already got a plan in mind? You’re going there cause you have a partner or you have a date with yourself.

ALEXANDER: Either one of those. Look, I waited on a woman. It still surprised me. I waited on a woman who was there with a guy, and so I said, “Are you two dating?” And she said, “Oh, no, this is just a friend of mine from work.” She’s there shopping for sex toys with a guy pal from work. Another woman said that she and her girlfriends show off their sex toys to each other like they used to show off the new Easybake oven they got when they were eight years old. This is not a thing that is hidden from anybody anymore.

ANDELMAN: Was there any product that you, after your week at Fascinations, bought and took home with you because you just had to have it?

ALEXANDER: I’m not telling.

ANDELMAN: Oh, c’mon, c’mon. Everybody’s got to tell you everything.

ALEXANDER: I’m not telling. I will say that I think there is a greater acceptance among men of sex toys than there used to be. When “Sex and the City” was on HBO, there was a famous vibrator episode, and people still talk about that as a sea change in the way women accepted sex toys and felt that it was okay for them to sort of come out of the closet about it. Men are now in the process of doing that, and manufacturers are realizing that maybe that’s a market they have not adequately addressed. Men are feeling more and more comfortable about that.

ANDELMAN: Not sure where to go with this, but I thought that men already had the market cornered on sex toys, inflatable dolls.

ALEXANDER: Yes, but inflatable dolls have traditionally been mainly sort of a gag gift. The new stuff is not so much inflatable. I don’t know if you’re under the rule of the FCC or not, but I can’t sort of talk about a lot of the names because they’re a little bit graphic. But there are new materials being used in some of these things, and they’re not typically full-on dolls. Now there is a new trend, which you saw in the movie Lars and the Real Girl, of silicone, very, very life-like, almost full-size female dolls that cost $4,000 to $5,000 sometimes. And some men, a few men, are starting to buy those. Generally, the sex toys I’m referring to for men, though, are sort of similar to vibrators or what’s called a masturbator sleeve. There are various anal devices that more and more men, straight men, are beginning to experiment with, and a lot of that comes from their familiarity with homosexual activities. We’ve become very sort of open now after HIV and so on and so forth about realizing how the homosexual world engages in sex, and some of that straight people have said hey, maybe I can try a little bit of that, maybe that feels good, and so they’re experimenting more and more with that sort of stuff.

ANDELMAN: A lot of the book, or at least the early part of the book, deals with products. You were just talking about toys and things. You spent a good deal of time, I guess, at Adam & Eve’s.

ALEXANDER: Yes. Adam & Eve is, as far as I can tell, the nation’s and probably the world’s largest mail-order purveyor of sex toys and porn. They are located in the unlikely spot of Hillsboro, North Carolina, and they were founded by the unlikely character of a fella by the name of Phil Harvey, who was Ivy League-educated, from a fairly well-to-do family, who really got into the adult business through his desire to do philanthropy. It’s a long story about how that all worked out, but he basically was an advocate for family planning back in the early ‘70s. And he began to sell condoms through the mail, and through a long series of events, that evolved into Adam & Eve, the Sinclair Institute, and a variety of other named businesses that fall under Phil Harvey Enterprises.

ANDELMAN: Or, as anyone who’s seen the catalog, “PHE,” which never made sense to me until I read your book.

ALEXANDER: Right.

ANDELMAN: The catalog says, not that I’ve ever seen their catalogs…

ALEXANDER: Not that you would know.

ANDELMAN: No, no, no, no, no! They reference “PHE” in there all the time and “PHE Inc.,” and I always wondered what that stood for.

ALEXANDER: Yep. That’s Phil Harvey Enterprises. And a percentage of the company’s profits are plowed back into a charitable foundation that promotes family planning and sexual health in the Third World.











ANDELMAN: And what was Phil like? It didn’t seem like he was the average person’s idea of a purveyor of adult videos and toys.

ALEXANDER: No, absolutely not. In fact, I’ve met very few people who met the stereotype, who worked in the adult business, who met the stereotype of who we think works in the adult business. Phil is a very funny guy with a dry, sardonic sense of humor. He’s very smart. He has been through a lot of battles including an epic battle with the federal government over pornography prosecutions, which he essentially won. That was back in the ‘80s during the Reagan Administration. He is somewhat cantankerous, and in his way, he is a large contributor to what I think has evolved into the hypersexual culture. He’s very thoughtful about what he’s done. He’s a businessman. He makes money, but for somebody who makes as much money as he does, you wouldn’t know it. I don’t think he particularly cares about enriching himself. I really do believe that he cares about the society we live in, which it sounds strange from a guy who sells sex toys and porn. But he gives what he does a lot of thought, and that breaks that stereotype that you’re referring to. He is not the sort of open-collared, gold-chained guy with a mustache that comes from the seventies.

ANDELMAN: If we can’t count on our stereotypes anymore, what good is society?

ALEXANDER: That’s one of the points of America Unzipped is that everything you thought you knew about the adult world, about sexuality, may not be what is actually the truth.

Click Here to Keep Reading!

© 2008 by Bob Andelman. All rights reserved.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Brian Alexander, "America Unzipped" author and MSNBC.com columnist: Mr. Media Interview, Part 2

Bookmark and Share
(Return to Part 1)
BOB ANDELMAN/Mr. MEDIA: I know 20 years ago -- and I’m going to link to this from the Mr. Media site at some point -- 20 years ago, I did a story with a woman about swingers and swingers clubs in the Tampa Bay area where I am, and I approached it in a similar way that you reported this. We went to these things, and I have to admit I was uncomfortable. We went to a bar that was a swing club, and it looked fairly normal at first, just a big bar and a lot of people hanging out. As the evening wore on, everybody’s going and introducing themselves, and people are getting a little looser, and the clothes are getting a little looser, and there was a point at which I said to my wife -- because I went with my wife -- I said, “I think I want to go.” I kind of wondered, when you did this, and you’ve got sections on, I think, a fetish convention and swingers, where does that line between observer and participant come for you? Was there ever, in doing your research, was there anything that made you uncomfortable?

BRIAN ALEXANDER: There are things that challenged my comfort levels, but by then, I had gotten to know enough people who were in either the fetish world or the swinging world or whatever the world they inhabited was to know that outside of that world, they weren’t really very different than I was. And they always respected my perspective. I always wore my wedding ring, for example, so everybody knew I was married, which doesn’t necessarily mean that I’m not going to do something, but if the subject came up, I would say, “I’m not here to necessarily be flogged,” for example, and nobody had a problem with that.











The only thing that really sort of made me uncomfortable occurs toward the end of the book when I’m at a sex club in Seattle. And I’m watching a woman in a cage, a naked woman in a cage, and I’m watching a guy be sort of slapped around and flogged a little bit by two people and he wants this to happen. It’s what he’s into. It wasn’t so much that I was disturbed on their behalf. I was sort of disturbed on our behalf and what our society is. And it’s not that I think that what they’re doing was bad. I think that what they’re doing is a form of escape from the broader culture in which we are living, which I think has kind of gone numb. And they are looking for a form of sensation, and so I felt bad for them. I wasn’t offended in any way. It worried me about why it is that people are seeking that out. I actually think that it’s really kind of a rational response, but I think that says a little something about the rest of us that that might be a rational response.

ANDELMAN: You mention that you’re married, and I was going to ask you about that. How did your wife feel about the trips that you made for the book, the research? Was she ever uncomfortable about it, and did you ever have to talk about this?

ALEXANDER: I think she would rather that I was in Baghdad.

ANDELMAN: Oh, man. That says a lot right there. And you know what, Brian? I can completely relate to that because I think that’s exactly the way my wife would feel if I had pursued this line of research.

ALEXANDER: I’ve covered a lot of different sort of things in my journalism career. I think that she understands what it is and what I do. And really what I try to do in my career is write about American culture and where we are, and this is, obviously, a very big part of American culture, and it’s one that, for all the talk we have in this country about sex, I don’t think we actually explore real sexuality in the real lives of people very much. It’s all very sort of surface, and I really, literally, wanted to unzip the country a little bit and provide some insight. I think she understood that. It did require a couple of discussions about what it is I was going to be doing and not doing and some reassuring on my part, but once that was done, she was okay.

ANDELMAN: Do you mind if I ask how old you are?

ALEXANDER: I’m 48 years old.

ANDELMAN: Oh, okay. That’s funny. We’re actually roughly the same age. Do you have kids?

ALEXANDER: A step-daughter.

ANDELMAN: Okay. So have you had to deal with the whole sex talk and all that other stuff, or do you manage to avoid that?

ALEXANDER: Well, she’s now an adult herself, really, and that was my wife’s job.

ANDELMAN: That didn’t overlap with all of this.

ALEXANDER: No, no, not at all.

ANDELMAN: I wondered about that in reading the book. There wasn’t too much relation to what you were doing to children, and I thought okay, he probably is not parenting at the moment that he’s going through all this. I’m guessing that I might’ve been on the right track there.

ALEXANDER: Yes, but that wouldn’t have mattered. I would’ve done the same thing anyway. It’s interesting. I’ve been asked the question about, “What about child porn” and so on. And my response to that is sex can be abused like everything can be abused. There’s a lot of fear in this country that’s been ginned up around the field of sexuality, but sex is no different than money or cars or guns or alcohol or drugs or anything else. Everything in our culture has potential for abuse. The people that I am focusing on in the book are grown-ups who are doing consensual activities with other grown-ups. In fact, there is a fairly strong self-policing attitude among the sexual explorers that I spoke with that says if there’s a hint of child abuse, child pornography, of forcing a grown-up to do something a grown-up doesn’t want to do, that is thoroughly rejected. They realize, especially people who like fetishes, swingers, people who go to sex clubs, they realize that they are on the spot and under scrutiny from people who would like to demonize what they do, and so they keep a pretty good eye out for any kind of abuses. I was actually quite impressed with that.









ANDELMAN: For the record, I wasn’t actually thinking of child porn whatsoever so much as I’ve found the last couple years, I’ve got an 11-year-old, and I find that whenever I’m doing anything, really it’s not even just if the topic is sexual or something else, I’m thinking, I have in the back of my mind a picture of my kid, and “Am I doing anything that will not reflect well there or cause a problem there?” To be honest with you, even in my choice of who I interview and what I interview them about, I’m a little more cautious these days than I would’ve been 15 years ago, just because. I don’t know. I’ve always thought I had fairly libertarian views about a lot of things, but maybe not.

ALEXANDER: I empathize with you. I suppose it’s tough for people in any field if they feel like there’s going to be any kind of a blow-back on their family, they have to give that some thought. I guess I just don’t care if people judge me one way or another because of what I choose to write about. I really choose to write about what I think is A) important to write about, what people ought to know something more about, and B) what I find fascinating and interesting. I find it very fascinating that we are a very sort of sexually experimental country. We’re seeking something, and what is it that we’re seeking? The book goes into what some of those things might be, but it’s not really just about sex. In fact, one of the smartest people that I spoke to was Candida Royalle, who was a pretty famous 1980s-era porn star who now directs and produces her own sort of couples-oriented erotic movies. She’s quite smart and interesting. She read the book in advance and provided a nice little blurb for the back, and she said to me, “Your book’s not really about sex at all, is it?” And on some level, it’s not.

ANDELMAN: Right. I agree with that.

ALEXANDER: Yes.

ANDELMAN: That actually surprised me. That was why I asked you about guilt first and that whole thing because it’s not a book about sex in the way that, well, like The Hite Report or The Kinsey Report. It’s not a Playboy-type of book about sex. I think you put your finger on it. It’s more about culture than anything.

ALEXANDER: I think it’s a way of looking at the culture or society that we’re living in through the prism of sexuality.

ANDELMAN: I got a laugh in the chapter about Fascinations when you worked at the adult retail store in Tempe. You make mention of something that was happening back in Gainesville, Florida, where a guy named Asher Sullivan was getting hassled for opening an adult retail store called Café Risque in tiny, tiny Waldo, Florida. And I thought: I know who Asher is, I know Café Risque, I know Waldo. I went to school at the University of Florida in Gainesville right next door, and I delivered mail through Waldo. And it’s a little hiccup of a town that’s best known for being a place where you would always get pulled over by the cops if you had out of town plates.

ALEXANDER: Right.

ANDELMAN: But the really interesting thing was, and you had no way of knowing this, although you may have heard about this since then, Asher Sullivan’s dad was famous throughout Florida for his 24-hour breakfast restaurants and his Skeeter’s Big Biscuits. And his son went in a completely different direction, and I thought, culturally, that was very, very interesting.

ALEXANDER: Yes, and his son probably didn’t think that it was necessarily a shameful thing to do. I don’t know what his father may have thought about it. But, well, here’s another example of that. The two brothers who founded a sort of miniature porn production empire, they live in California, but they were raised in an upper-class realm of Connecticut, went to private schools. One went to Stanford, one went to another liberal arts school. Their mother, and I picture their mother as being a very sort of genteel, country club, Connecticut woman, their mother gave them the money to finance buying this porn production company. It’s seen as a business. We just saw that a few weeks ago. Somebody paid half a billion dollars for Adult FriendFinder, which is a major hook-up site on the Internet where people go mainly for casual encounters or meet somebody who’s into whatever thing they’re into.

ANDELMAN: Oh, my God. People use the Internet for that?

ALEXANDER: People use the Internet for that, believe it or not. But the fact is The Wall Street Journal covers this stuff now.

ANDELMAN: Right.

ALEXANDER: Again, this is not the sort of proto-Mafioso guys anymore. They’re businesspeople.









ANDELMAN: There was a story in Portfolio magazine a month ago where they went behind-the-scenes in these companies that produce porn on the Internet and how YouPorn was…

ALEXANDER: YouTube.

ANDELMAN: No. There’s YouTube, but there’s one called YouPorn, which is all porn the way YouTube is all everything else. And I thought, I’m astounded to see this very white-collar, Park Avenue type of business magazine go into this. There was another example I thought of a moment ago. There was a show on Showtime, I don’t know if it’s still on or not, that was a documentary series about Seymour Butts, a porn producer. And they spiced it up with moments of porn that he produced here and there, but mostly, it was about this porn producer’s private life or lack thereof and how his mother was always trying to fix him up. It really is different than even five or 10 years ago the things that are mainstream, and I think you made that point.

ALEXANDER: Yes, the book is really about how all this is now really quite mainstream. When you get Ivy League businesspeople getting involved in this sort of stuff, it’s far past the way it used to be. Now you’ve got venture capitalists in Silicon Valley funding the expansion of a sex toy outfit. What I’m thinking about is a company called Jimmy Jane, and they’ve got some funding from some of the most prominent Silicon Valley venture capitalists to make new vibrators.

ANDELMAN: Don’t we need more new vibrators?

ALEXANDER: You can never have too many good vibrators.

ANDELMAN: And you can never have too many batteries.

Click Here to Keep Reading!

© 2008 by Bob Andelman. All rights reserved.



Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Brian Alexander, "America Unzipped" author and MSNBC.com columnist: Mr. Media Interview, Part 3

Bookmark and Share
(Return to Part 2)
(Return to Part 1)

BOB ANDELMAN/Mr. MEDIA: In your column and even in researching the book, why do you think so many people tell you so much about their private lives?

BRIAN ALEXANDER: People have asked me that. I don’t really know how to answer the question other than, when I was going around the country for America Unzipped, I would try to make some sort of contact with people I wanted to talk to before I went wherever it was I was going to go. And I think that they sensed that A) I had done a lot of advanced research so I was not just showing up out of the blue, I knew a little bit about what I was talking about, and B) I think even when I met people for the first time, if I hadn’t made contact before, like people in the adult store, for example, I think they sensed I was not going to judge them. I think they thought this guy has an open mind to what it is I want to say. I think this attitude is departing, but I think sometimes it’s still here. People are tired of being judged or had shame heaped upon them for having a particular interest.










For example, at a fetish convention in Tampa, I interviewed a “pony,” for example, a guy with a pony fetish, and he’s a biology professor at a university. And I didn’t laugh at him. I just talked with him. He’s a very smart guy with all of his own interests, and he sensed that I was listening to what he had to say. If something was funny, I laughed. I said, “That’s really funny,” and oftentimes, people would say, “Yeah, that is pretty funny.” I was not going to humiliate them or shame them, but I was going to enjoy what they enjoy. I was going to have fun when they were having fun, and with them, sometimes it was fun. Several times when I was talking with people who are into bondage or domination or polyamory or fetish, I’d say, “This just sounds like a lot of work to me.” And they would laugh, and they’d say, “Sometimes it is a lot of work, and sometimes I come home and I’ve worked hard all day, and I say, ‘Honey, can we just have regular sex?’” I just try to make people feel at ease. And once they realize that, “Hey, this guy’s not going to act like an 8th-grader, and he’s also not going humiliate me,” they’re happy to talk about it cause they would like a little more understanding out there about whatever it is they’re doing.

ANDELMAN: Okay. Polyamory – don’t know that one.

ALEXANDER: Polyamory is, well, as the Latinate, implies, is loving more than one person. For example, there’s a woman who is in the book, Janice, who lives with her boyfriend/lover but has a side lover who she meets for sex occasionally. Sometimes they all three might meet for sex, but sometimes she goes with him alone and meets for sex, and it’s all out in the open. And so that’s a polyamorous relationship.

ANDELMAN: I see. Poly, I get. I didn’t make the connection to multiple partners. I thought maybe it had something to do with artificial, maybe things that you make plumbing equipment out of or something. I’m so ashamed that I even asked now.

ALEXANDER: No, no, don’t.

ANDELMAN: Do you think people are more likely to open up these days about sex -- or money -- for example?

ALEXANDER: That’s a good question. If it’s a private conversation, I think they might actually be more open discussing sex than money.

ANDELMAN: Or how much they pay for sex.

ALEXANDER: The fact they pay for it at all. I’m just guessing because I didn’t ask too many questions about money, but I would say people would probably be more open about sex than money.

ANDELMAN: And did you find the conversations, when people did talk to you about their sex lives or what they’re interested in, was it more interesting to hear them talk about more traditional sex or the wilder types of things?

ALEXANDER: I was interested in all of it so I guess I found them equally interesting. We are groping, I think, with how to feel about sexuality and sexual desire, our fantasies, and so on, and so I’m interested in however anybody expresses that. So while part of the book deals with what some people might consider edgy sexuality, a lot of the book deals with very sort of normal, straight, what’s called vanilla sexuality and how people are trying to enhance that.










For example, I go to the Midwest, and I attempt to work as a Passion Party sales representative where it’s sort of like on the model of Tupperware parties, and women go into their houses, and they have a little party, and they show off sex toys and lotions and potions and so on. I don’t think too many of those women were into, seriously anyway, into bondage or into any sort of extreme fetishes, but they were open to exploring in ways that I had not anticipated. Most of them were very conservative, Republican, Southern Baptist women who may have had a threesome at some point and made a personal choice for themselves: “Do I like that, or do I not like that?” Some did, some didn’t. They felt like they were going to be the ultimate deciders of their own sexuality, and it was not going to be imposed by their churches or their politics or anything else, that this was a deeply personal option for them to choose how they wanted to go. And so I was interested in that as much as I was interested in the woman who hung weights from her labia.

ANDELMAN: Was that Rosie? No, I’m sorry. No, she hangs upside down. I’m sorry. I have trouble keeping it all straight. There was one, I think it was a couple, correct me if I’m wrong and maybe at the Passion Party, where they had been married like 15 or 20 years and to keep things interesting, they were taking and this is the way you had it in the book “baby steps with anal sex”. Now, I don’t know. Maybe I’m off my rocker, but it seems like anal sex, you’re either doing it, or you’re not.

ALEXANDER: Well, there is a learning curve.

ANDELMAN: Oh, okay. Alright.

ALEXANDER: Without getting into too much detail, the more gradually you do that, usually the better the result in the end.

ANDELMAN: But I guess what I’m saying is that if you’re at the point where you’re having this conversation with someone and you’re telling them that you’re doing that, I’m thinking that you’re basically doing it, that there’s no baby steps.

ALEXANDER: Yes. I got the impression from her that they are doing it, and they’re still figuring out all the nuances.

ANDELMAN: You talk about some of the more unusual sexual practices, some of them which are more legend than reality, I think. The Dirty Sanchez, queefing… Is there anything that was too over the top for you either to write about, or, when you’re standing with someone and they start telling you this, are you enough of a high-quality poker player that you can keep a straight face, or did you laugh or the edges of your smile start giving way, and you know you’re going to crack up at any moment?

ALEXANDER: If I was shocked or appalled or amused or whatever, I would let people know that, and then I’d say, “Wait, you gotta back up now, explain this to me.”

ANDELMAN: Right.

ALEXANDER: And, generally, they’d be happy to because they felt I really wanted to know about it, and they’re used to sort of having people think wait, what’s that all about? There was nothing there that I thought was…I don’t know if I’ve become slightly jaded or not, but there was nothing that just blew me away so much that I just couldn’t deal with it. I do spend some time at a porn production house called kink.com, and I watch a pretty extreme bondage scenario being taken out including electricity torture and so on, but knowing the people involved, I had met the main woman involved the day before and had actually met her some months before in another context, and we had talked and chatted. I knew about her, who she was, what she was, how she was, and that she had reasons for doing what she was doing. So while I did not necessarily find it to my taste, it didn’t blow me away. It didn’t like, so shock me that I couldn’t deal with it.

People have a huge array of reasons for whatever it is that they happen to be interested in, which is why I think the idea of demonizing sex that may seem unusual to the rest of us is counterproductive because the way I might like to do it or the way you might like to do it, somebody might find that strange or unusual. People do what they want to do, and the idea that somehow you’re going to condemn them or think that it’s a bad thing, it doesn’t serve any purpose. So I was always happy to hear about whatever it is people were into even if I personally didn’t have any interest in it as a personal practice.

ANDELMAN: Now, this was your first book, I believe.

ALEXANDER: No, this is my third book.

ANDELMAN: It’s your third book?

ALEXANDER: Yeah.

ANDELMAN: Oh, what were the other two? I’m sorry.










ALEXANDER: I did a book called Rapture: How Biotech Became the New Religion. And some years before that, I did another small book about rainforests around the world called Green Cathedrals.

ANDELMAN: Oh, I apologize. I didn’t realize that. I was going to say that most everyone I have ever interviewed who has written a book -- and I’ve written nine of them so I know how this works -- usually has another one in the works by the time the current one comes out. So my question is: are you working on something else?

ALEXANDER: I’m thinking about something else that has sort of not gotten beyond that. I have my regular jobs that I do to pay the mortgage and my column. I’m a contributing editor at Glamour magazine, and I’m a frequent contributor to Outside magazine as well as a few newspapers. I have my regular magazine work to do, and then this book has now come out, and that’s been a little bit of a whirlwind. But I’m thinking about a couple different things, and we’ll just have to see what happens. I don’t know what direction it’s going to go in, but my goal is to really write about the culture in which we’re living cause I think American culture is endlessly fascinating to me.

ANDELMAN: I have one last question for you, Brian, and that is: what would your boyhood pastor, Father Schultz, think of your work?

ALEXANDER: No doubt he would not approve of my work, although I think if he were to really read the book and sort of try to absorb what it is that I’m saying, I think he might understand it and think that maybe we’re not quite as far apart as it might seem at first. You never know. You never know. I don’t know how it would be taken.

© 2008 by Bob Andelman. All rights reserved.



Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, September 14, 2007

Chuck Shepherd, "News of the Weird" syndicated columnist: Mr. Media Classic

Bookmark and Share

Originally Published October 21, 1996

If it's the 12th of the month — any month — Chuck Shepherd can be found eating a large pepperoni pizza pie. It's a rare taste treat for the normally diet-conscious newspaper columnist, the world's reigning expert on mankind's most caustic behavior.

Every week for the last seven years, Shepherd's syndicated weekly column, "News of the Weird," has caused readers of 250 newspapers to laugh out loud on buses, trains, taxis and in the privacy of their bathrooms. Reading and laughing hysterically over his carefully culled nuggets of bizarre deaths, stupid criminals, sexual kinks and embarrassing moments in the lives of once-private citizens is one of Americans' guiltiest pleasures.

Over lunch at one of St. Petersburg, Fla.'s premier pizza palaces, Mr. Media and Mr. Weird toasted Shepherd's new book, The Concrete Enema and Other News of the Weird Classics (Andrews and McMeel).

First of all, where did he ever come up with such a painful sounding title?

"That was your idea, remember?" Shepherd says, rolling his eyes, knowing the question was a test.

The title suggested itself more than a year earlier, the first time we met for lunch. Shepherd always arrives with newspaper clips and trivia; that day, he told the extremely weird story of the concrete enema.

And while the concrete enema earned top billing in his book — you'll have to buy a copy to learn why — it's just one in a stream of jaw-dropping tales Shepherd recounts in his new collection. Chapters include: "Can't Possibly Be True"; "Least Meritorious Lawsuits"; "Death"; "Japan" (the only country rating an entire chapter); and "Not My Fault."

"There are very few stupid criminal stories because every one of those I hear sounds like a variation of something I already reported," he says. In fact, his last collection was America's Least Competent Criminals (HarperPerennial).











Along that line, Shepherd added a new category to his column: "No Longer Weird." These are stories that were once weird but have become so common "they must be retired from circulation," he says. Among them:

"What-Goes-Around-Comes-Around Hunting Accidents." Such as the recent hunting accident in New York where two guys drew each other ever closer with turkey lures until one shot the other. "That happens every season now, so I'm retiring it."

"Dumb Robbers." For example, the guy who holds up a bank but leaves his wallet on the counter or locks his keys in the getaway car.

Believe it or not, there are stories that Shepherd — who has an entire chapter in the book devoted to "Fetishes on Parade" — will never report. "Any story where the tragedy outweighs the irony, sometimes a death, or cruelty in the death of an animal," he says. "I can't find any irony that would outweigh that."

The "News of the Weird" column — plus the four previous books it inspired and two zines, View From the Ledge and Planet Chuck — develop from the hundreds of newspaper clippings Shepherd pores over every week. He personally reads five daily papers and subscribes to 75 journals, magazines, newsletters and zines. What he doesn't spot first comes via a worldwide network of correspondents who eagerly comb local papers from Toledo to Tokyo, seeking out weird news with which to impress the master.










"I like irony more than just humor," he explains. "And utter human stupidity. I have a limit on the number of sex or cute stories I'll run. But if I had 15 stories of gross human stupidity each week I'd run 'em."

Such as the man who was hospitalized with a head injury in Bowling Green, Ky. He said, "I wanted to see how close I could hold my head to a moving train without getting hit."

© 2007 by Bob Andelman. All rights reserved.


Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Chris Napolitano, "Playboy Magazine" editor: Mr. Media Interview, Pt. 1

Bookmark and Share

When I was a student at the University of Florida, studying film during the day and writing freelance stories at night, I landed two choice assignments. Choice, that is, for a horny, unrequited, socially awkward twenty-year-old.

First, I got to spend an afternoon hanging out with Russ Myers, a notorious film director and king of loopy seventies porn, the man who gave movie critic Roger Ebert his notorious film credit on Beneath the Valley of the Ultra-Vixens. That was a wild day.

The other unforgettable assignment was interviewing Playboy magazine photographer David Chan, who came to Gainesville to uncover the most delectable Gator coeds for “Girls of the Southeastern Conference” pictorial. Chan was a delightful guy with an enviable job. Hundreds of beautiful women were lined up outside his headquarters at the University Holiday Inn to bare their, uh, natural assets.

But Playboy and I go back about a decade or so earlier to the time when I discovered my dad’s prized stack of 1960s Playboy s in a cardboard box in the attic on top of an old cedar wardrobe. And by the time I was thirteen, I ordered a subscription of my own. And once a month ever since, I’ve looked forward to the arrival of the next issue.

A female friend jokingly asked if I read Playboy for the articles. Articles? I answered. Are there articles in Playboy ?

Apparently, there are because my guest today is Chris Napolitano, the magazine’s editorial director. If you look at the masthead, the only name listed higher is the magazine’s founder, Hugh Hefner.

Napolitano began his career with Playboy in 1988 as an editorial assistant in the fiction department and now, in his 20th year with the magazine, is responsible for the day-to-day editorial policy and operations of Playboy magazine. He reports to Hef and is based in the company’s New York publishing headquarters.


ANDELMAN: So, when did you guys start slipping articles in between the photos?

NAPOLITANO: When did that happen? Ever since the first issue in 1954. In fact, we started slipping more nude photographs in the book over the next ensuing years and decades. It was pretty article-heavy right from the very beginning.

ANDELMAN: That’s true. I do know that because I have read an awful lot of articles in there. I’m a huge fan of the Playboy interviews in particular, which are a wonderful part of the magazine, and I think there’s probably a lot of women out there who only read the magazine for things like the interview.

NAPOLITANO: It’s the one that gets attention. We have a great tradition going back more than 40 years with the Playboy interview.











ANDELMAN: How do you decide who’s appropriate for the interview?

NAPOLITANO: Well, the rule of thumb is household name. We usually don’t introduce personalities or thinkers no matter how interesting we might feel the things that they have to say are. They need to reach a certain point of critical mass where people are going to seek out the magazine based on who we’re talking to.

ANDELMAN: It seems like in recent years the folks interviewed in there, it’s broadened a bit, it’s gotten a bit younger at times. It seems like there’ve been some rap stars in there, maybe some film stars that maybe 20 years ago might not have quite qualified.

NAPOLITANO: That’s right. One of the things we used to talk about was that we don’t get Al Pacino and Godfather I, we get Al Pacino and Godfather II. In other words, somebody who’s clearly established themselves as having a strong track record. But in terms of actors, the movie industry has very much changed since then and with films being in theaters for about two weeks and then going to DVD, everything moves a little bit faster. The actors are a little younger and perhaps not quite as iconic. We had a great interview with Bruce Willis that we just ran in the July issue. And we all agree that Bruce Willis is somebody that was pretty high up on the list of guys that our readers liked. And then we scratched our heads a little bit and realized that this was the third interview with Bruce Willis, which was pretty extraordinary. It was quite an unusual thing to go back to him. And I think that’s because they don’t make stars like they used to. So we’ve adapted.

ANDELMAN: I read that that was the third time for Willis. Some people would probably scratch their heads and say, “You’ve interviewed Bruce Willis at length three times?” What’s interesting, it seems, about a guy like Willis is he’s always got something to say. This time I think the big takeaway was that he has changed political parties. And you got into that, and that was quite shocking thinking about how adamantly Republican he had been in recent years.

NAPOLITANO: We see a lot of the information that we publish in that long-form interview informs a lot of the coverage that Bruce Willis will get now for the next year or two. Any lengthy profile, everyone will use our interviews as a source and a sourcebook for various personalities. And that’s another thing that we are very proud of with the interview.











ANDELMAN: And I imagine that’s something that you look for, too, in terms of deciding who the interview will be. It’s someone who the public or the rest of the press will have to refer back to Playboy .

NAPOLITANO: That’s right. They’re gonna be able to speak on a number of different subjects in depth, coherently and in an interesting way. These are all things that we think about when we assign the interview. A taciturn guy is not necessarily the best thing for us.

ANDELMAN: It’s got to be someone who has something to say and is willing to say it.

NAPOLITANO: Right. Exactly, exactly.

ANDELMAN: Who are the big guests out there right now that you haven’t been able to get or, for whatever reason, have not been able to bring into the Playboy interview?

NAPOLITANO: Well, very often the hardest guests for us would be on the political side. I think that Hollywood responds very well to the kind of things that we do with the interviews. So, the guests usually come in Hollywood, it’s just a matter of time, when they feel that their project is right and that they’re willing to step out or that they want to finally let loose a little bit. So on the Hollywood side, I would love to hear from Angelina Jolie. On the political side, we’ve got a whole roster of political candidates for President out there. And I’m gonna cross my fingers and not really go into it too much, but we have had some good success with interesting some people in doing the interview for us, and as we roll out through the end of the year, you’ll see who they are.

ANDELMAN: I’m gonna take a guess, and I don’t expect you to confirm these, but I’m gonna guess that running for President, the three most interesting for your purposes would probably be Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, and maybe Bloomberg if he runs. I’m guessing that Hillary Clinton just probably will not do it at all. Has she been asked and approached?

NAPOLITANO: We’ve been in conversation with Hillary and Bill, so we know where they stand with us.

ANDELMAN: That would be a no?

NAPOLITANO: Pretty much, yeah. At this point. The idea is to kind of come around and make them have to say yes because everybody else is talking to us.

ANDELMAN: And what about in the literary area, the cultural area? One of the things that used to be fascinating to read is there were a lot of literary figures who would be interviewed in there, whether it be Norman Mailer, people like that. There doesn’t seem to be as many of those these days.

NAPOLITANO: I’ve kind of put on the slate that we should have our eye on John Updike for an interview. He’s a regular contributor to the magazine, but I think that he’s a shy guy and a shy public speaker. But he’s a very engaging guy, and I think that our readers would be interested, and it’s kind of funny that we haven’t quite covered him. Philip Roth is another guy that I want to bring in and land. Thomas Pynchon would be another person that I think would make headlines, perhaps a little bit off-beat for the bulk of our readers, but that would be another kind of literary find for us. But in general, the reason why you don’t see as many writers these days is when we look at the total package of the magazine, we’ve had extraordinarily good fortune in landing writers to write for us. So if we have them contributing pieces, we’re less inclined to try to find a way to get them in the magazine using the interview as a platform.











ANDELMAN: That makes sense. Of course, besides the interview, the other thing that Playboy tends to be known for is getting celebrity women to pose for the magazine. I’m thinking that’s the other big part of the equation in terms of if Playboy wants to make a big splash this month, it would love to have a big celebrity interview and a big celebrity photo spread.

NAPOLITANO: That’s right.

ANDELMAN: Is that a fair…?

NAPOLITANO: Uh huh, yep, yep, although we don’t tie the interview and photos together.

ANDELMAN: No, it’s just nice to have two big ones in the same issue.

NAPOLITANO: Absolutely, absolutely.

ANDELMAN: Two big features, pardon me. I don’t want to suggest I meant anything other than that. Again, there was talk in the last couple years that celebrities, women, were not as inclined to pose for Playboy as maybe they had been in the past, that they didn’t see it as the same path. Do you see that as true these days?

NAPOLITANO: Yes. I mean, I think that it’s a more complicated environment than it has been in the past. I think that, personally, a lot of celebrities would be more than happy to pose for us, but there are a number of people who have a lot at stake in their individual decisions. It’s not the same as when Sharon Stone and Philip Dixon decided to take some photographs. There’s a whole bunch of ramifications. They have endorsements, commercial endorsements, they have appearances at stake, and a bunch of advisors, and so it’s a really complicated process these days. And what we try to do is just reduce it to the idea that never mind the money, naturally the PR and establishing yourself and showing another side of yourself to the public is a major factor, and they should definitely consider that as a plus. But, also, it’s about taking a great photograph, a kind of photograph that will be seared in the memory of the national consciousness, and I think that’s something that doesn’t come up as often as it should in our conversations with them.

ANDELMAN: If the phone rings when we’re done, and it’s Angelina Jolie’s people and they’re calling to say, “Listen, Angelina would love to do the magazine, your choice, she’ll either do the interview, or she’ll do the photo spread,” which do you choose?

NAPOLITANO: Well, I certainly would choose the photo spread first. Absolutely.

ANDELMAN: Okay. So this is good. This is consistent with what I expected. I’m afraid I’d be disappointed if you said anything else, Chris. Who else would you like to have do a photo spread in the coming months to year?

NAPOLITANO: Oh, well, there are plenty of people. Anybody that is attractive and willing to embrace the sort of Playboy spirit and the Playboy lifestyle is on that list. It’s a great platform for reinvention and rejuvenation, so there’s a handful of young celebrities out there right now who are struggling a little bit or having personal struggles, and I’d see us as a great venue for them to kind of break out of that.











ANDELMAN: Let me guess. Lindsay Lohan?

NAPOLITANO: That would be one name.

ANDELMAN: Alright. Were you surprised at how upset Jessica Alba was when you ran a photo of her clothed on the cover of the magazine?

NAPOLITANO: Well, that’s a tricky area. That’s a tricky subject for us. Again, I think that it’s a group decision for when people embrace us or decide to cooperate with us. And it’s probably a group decision when there are upset feelings, maybe because other arrangements have been made for exposure for the personality or the celebrity that’s disruptive, or maybe it’s seen as a loss of control by the people who would like to be making these decisions for her. So, that’s about as far as I’ll go with that. I think this was more of a reaction by….This was not the way that people in Hollywood like to see things get done, and I think that the ultimate reaction to that was Jessica stepping out and saying that she did not want to be on the cover at the time that we put her on there.

ANDELMAN: Was that a political lesson for the editors of Playboy for going forward?

NAPOLITANO: I don’t think it’s anything that we didn’t necessarily anticipate. You’ve got the celebrity tabloids that are gonna run any pictures and any stories about the stars that they think will drive newsstand sales and entice their readers. Then you’ve got the glossies with Vanity Fair and others who have full cooperation from celebrities undoing things that are photo-driven essays with kind of bland stories attached to them. Playboy is somewhere in the middle between those two things. The interview is something where the only negotiation is, “Are you gonna do it or not?” And we’re gonna ask the questions and you can trust us to publish what you say and nothing but. That course has been really helpful to us because they are never surprised by what the story is about because they know what came out of their mouth. So the flip side of that is that when they choose Vanity Fair’s venue they know what they’re getting. They have no control over or some of the time when Us or In Style or In Touch or any of those books go forward with or let alone Star or any of those kind of things do it. And we see ourselves kind of in the middle. We’ll do what we want because, as mainstream as we are and as widely sold as we are, we have a little bit of an edge. There’s a little renegade quality to what we do.


© 2007 by Bob Andelman. All rights reserved.



Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,