Why does Sports Illustrated have such inconsistent nudity standards?

It seems most magazines/media have specific nudity standards of what they can allow/not allow.

So what's going on with Sports Illustrated and their current Swimsuit edition?

I swear it changes from page to page or even on the same page/same bikini but from a different angle.

In one shot you'll get a totally see-thru shot...then the next shot the areolas/nipples will be airbrushed out as if you stole your mom's JC Penny's catalog. One model will have half her areola hanging out/uncensored...the next girl will be wearing an almost transparent mesh top but zero hint of nipple.

Even the same girl/same shoot will have totally different censorship/airbrushing depending on the picture.

Are some pictures intended only for the print magazine/more censored?

Do the women pick/choose which shots they want censored?

There just seems to be no rhyme or reason with their odd airbrushing. At this point it's obvious the general public isn't freaking out/protesting at seeing nipple...so why do they still airbrush so many shots like a Sears lingerie ad?

 

It's probably up to the model.

 

You raise an interesting point, I've thought about this too.

I don't know, since SI doesn't have a clear policy regarding nudity, it varies from model to model and sometimes between photos of the same shoot, like you said. I guess it depends on the photographer taking the shoot and on the model in question, what she's ready to reveal or not.

Take Kate Upton for instance, there was no nipple in sight, even though in some pics it should have been there. The same with Barbara Palvin. And there are other models like Bianca Balti, who went fully topless for her shoot (don't remember seeing that before), or Hannah Ferguson, who also had a very revealing shoot.

So it's probably a combination of both model and photographer. I'd like to see all the models who pose for SI have revealing shoots and even nudity, but I doubt it's gonna happen anytime soon.

 

Models and photographers don't make those kinds of decisions. Art directors do.

And art directors also have to work under limitations. Each of these models is contracted to an agency, and her contract with the agency stipulates what she can and cannot do. How much skin she can show. Deals as big as SI Swimsuit Issue are negotiated individually with very detailed contracts that might be different from her usual contract.

But also, a model may have a long term contract with a major corporation that further limits what she can do. If she is a spokesman for Pepsi or Maybelline, they have very specific details about what she can do. Consumer companies want to avoid another Ivory Snow. Her agency and any company she hires out to during the term of the contract has to abide by it. Otherwise she and the agency stand to lose millions. Being able to show a nipple in SI is not worth that to them. The big contracts like that are worth fortunes. And the publicity they get from SI gets them those kinds of contracts.

Nobody on these shoots is winging it. They are working to satisfy specific requirements of several dozen bosses.

 

Thanks for the replies. What didn't make sense is that the same model will have everything airbrushed out in one swimsuit but the same model is showing the goods in a different swimsuit...even in the same Sports Illustrated shoot/same beach/same photographer. Usually it's all nor nothing with specific models....the inconsistencies with this shoot was as if Sport Illustrated put all of the same model's pictures on a wall and threw darts randomly to see which get censored.

 

If models dont wants nipple: art director cant say nothing. Simple as that.

 

It might be as simple as to what they think they can slip past the chains. It's sold at supermarket checkouts. I am sure there is at least one Polly Prude who will have a meltdown it little Timmaaaay picks it up and sees too much boob for the first time.

 

To be boring i think it comes down to sales. They make projections on how much they can sell depending on the amount of skin the pics show. Try and keep as big demographic as possible interested in buying the magazine.

 

I would say there is also a limitation as to how much nudity they can have under the '' gender '' of magazine they claim to be.