CNBC.com managing editor Allen Wastler wonders Monday about how much skin should be shown in a business news story about a fashion show.
“Maybe so. The censored shots weren’t pornographic and they weren’t anything you wouldn’t see on the beach. And, hey, what’s the whole purpose of the presentation anyway? We’re doing it in part because we know our male-skewed audience will find it … interesting. It’s the same reason Sports Illustrated prints its swimsuit issue and networks run Victoria’s Secret stories.
“Of course, it IS a legitimate fashion event and there is some serious money in the business. Nevertheless there are those who think there shouldn’t be any risque material on a business news site at all. I don’t share that opinion. Business news is vital to everyone, yet comes off as boring. A little spice here and there may get people to pay generally a little more attention.”
Read more here.
The Sports Business Journal is looking for an innovative and driven home page editor / digital…
Crain Communications is seeking a meticulous and analytical data editor to oversee the strategy and…
Financial Times chief economics commentator Martin Wolf writes about a fake "Martin Wolf" that is doling…
We are looking for a Reporter to join ION Analytics’ Paris Bureau covering French M&A…
The New York Times is seeking an editor to help run our coverage of the…
This position will be Hybrid in the office/market 3 days per week, and those days…
View Comments
Perhaps if the business news didn't "come off as boring" then there would be no need for "a little spice" and "a little fun." When you need to resort to gratuitous swimsuit p.r. shots to inject some interest in your site or network it is time to rethink the focus. Simply accepting the myth that women aren't interested in biz news is another red flag here. Is this post a joke of some kind?