Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/03/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]She's completely out of her depth. Not too surprising, most manipulators hardly ever see when they are out manipulated themselves. I suspect she though that this was a PR thing for her, whereas GQ was merely doing its editorial thing, for their own reasons, not hers. S.d. On Mar 16, 2010, at 1:46 PM, Kyle Cassidy wrote: > George sed: > >> agreeing to a photo shoot for GQ >> (and signing a Release before the shoot;... >> sort of negate any potential post-shoot beefs? > > I do agree. The photo I've seen from the GQ shoot looked an awful lot like > the video tape. It can't be that she didn't know what they were going to > look like - she's on the set, _wearing no pants_ and it's for _GQ_ -- it's > not like Jill Greeberg's malicious post-processing of John McCain. I > haven't read her complaints, so I'm only speculating, but from what I saw > of that video and the final shot, it looks like she knew what was going > on. And like someone else pointed out, she's not a political or media > novice. And I don't think the photos are unflattering at all. They're not > racy, though they are provocative, which is the sad thing -- the > connotation of doing a photo shoot like that is specifically to drag the > John Edwards affair back into the limelight -- which I expect GQ to do, > it's their job -- but I think "No I won't pose with no pants on, thanks > for asking" is the appropriate response out of respect for a former lover. > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information