Sunday, November 15, 2009
Last month it was revealed on Jay Leno that Chelsea Handler would be on the cover of the Decemember isssue of PLayboy . I was excited because i always found her an attractive woman and would greatly enjoy seeing her naked, but to my surprise she is not nude at all. The putting her on the cover is another gimic used by PLayboy such as putting Marge Simpson on the cover the previous month. Technically it is not false advertisement if playboy did not say she would be nude in the magazine, but upon seeing a beautiful female on the cover one would assume she will be posing nude in said magazine. I imagine that is what their advertisement department envisioned in my honest opinion. I was even tempted to purchase this edition just for the simple fact i was misled into thinking she would be posing in a spread , but upon further investigation she is not nude. she has a small comedy article in the magazine about the holidays. I am mainly writing this blog to let people know this before they buy the magazine in the vain hop of seeing Chelsea's naughty bits. Is it wrong to assume that the woman pictured on the cover would be nude in a magazine famous for nude spread of semi-famous people and such? I personally do not think so. Apparently there is another cover which shows the true celebrity nude of this month. She is some contestant form Dancing with the Stars, but i do not care about her. I just wanted Chelsea handler. To sum it all up this is just a dissapointment to me, because upon learning of the cover i had inticpated the magazine and now I am totally let down.
Posted by x71isnwor at 11:22 AM