1. Washington Post Magazine ‘Embarrassed’ Over Using Male Symbol for Its Women’s March Cover Story
|The Washington Post Express mistakenly used the male symbol, left, for its Women’s March on Washington cover story. The corrected version is on the right. (Photo: Washington Post Express)|
It didn’t take long for people to notice the mistake.
“Shout out to The Washington Post Express who accidentally put the male symbol for the woman’s march on their cover today,” wrote Twitter user Kimberly Betsill.
“The Washington Post Express nailed it so hard this morning,” wrote Twitter user Tim Young. “Give it a second, you’ll figure it out…”
“Is this some kind of record for largest typo,” tweeted Sam Thielman.
Some questioned how many women are actually on staff at the publication, on the assumption that one of them would have caught the error before the issue hit the printers. “Hire more women,” wrote Twitter user Ashley Louise. “Or proofreaders of any gender!” added user Maria McMichael.
Twitter user Kirsten wrote, “I can completely imagine a female employee trying to correct this while a male employee talks over her to praise it.” And user Nell chimed in, “‘But it was pink’ — your all male editorial team (hire some ladies, thanks).”
To their credit, the Express staff quickly acknowledged the mix-up, tweeting, “We made a mistake on our cover this morning and we’re very embarrassed. We erroneously used a male symbol instead of a female symbol.”
They followed that up with a post featuring what the cover image should have looked like, with the correct symbol for female.
Some users on social media — who, let’s be honest, aren’t always so kind about mistakes — were surprisingly forgiving. “Appreciate the candor and apology,” wrote Twitter user Gwenda Bond. “Good job on copping to the mistake.”
2. Kendall Jenner and Gigi Hadid have NO KNEES in W Magazine cover shoot after 'editing error'
|Kendall Jenner and Gigi Hadid have no knees (but they do in real life) (Photo: Jason Kibbler/W Magazine)|
The fancy images, which are part of the magazine's 10th Anniversary Art issue , show Kendall cuddling a puppy and Gigi offering her a drink, while a chicken peeks out of a tent and a drone lies abandoned in the foreground - which is surreal enough situation even without the limb issue.
Both women appear to have one of their legs intact, while the other is an odd, rubbery-looking kneeless limb, more commonly seen on a Barbie doll.
It was spotted by Twitter users, with one commenting: "Another unrealistic body expectation for women : no knees"
It's unclear if it was intentional, or an EPIC editing error.
Kendall and Gigi 's bizarre shoot formed the basis of anniversary editions for W Magazine , with another shot, entitled 'Placebo Pets', seeing them both given animal-esque features like noses and ears - and they don’t look too far removed from a real life Snapchat filter.
Artists Lizzie Fitch and Ryan Trecartin are behind the work, and have collaborated with the models on the series of elaborate shoots, including a performance art video where Kendall and Gigi recreate four iconic art pieces, including works by Yves Klein and Yoko Ono.
“Kendall Jenner and Gigi Hadid appear as super friendly, domesticated humanoid pets,” explains Trecartin.
“The idea grew out of artists wondering:’Who would survive if a superior alien humanoid species came to Earth?’ Their answer: ‘The friendliest.’
“There’s a certain power that animals have over us when they respond to us in unexpected, friendly ways. And it’s really them domesticating us almost more than us domesticating them, because they’re training us to want them.”
3. A Black Hair Magazine Said They Accidentally Used A White Model On Their Cover
|Facebook / Blackhair Magazine|
The announcement came after a young woman noticed that an old modelling photo of herself was used for cover of the December/January issue of Blackhair magazine, which describes itself as a style magazine “packed with hair inspiration for black and mixed race women”.
In a post on Instagram Emily Bador said she was “upset and angry” after discovering she had unwittingly become the face of the publication.
“If I had known it was going to be published, I would never have condoned it. … I was never asked by the photographer/hair salon/anyone if this image could be used for the cover of Blackhair,” she said.
Bador, who appears to look mixed-race in the image, said the photo was taken roughly three or four years ago, when she was 15 years old. Since then, she said, she had learned about cultural appropriation and the struggles black women experience with their portrayal in the media.
“Growing up in a very very white city,” she wrote in the Instagram post, “I had no idea the struggles black women face and how often they were persecuted for their hair. I didn’t understand how black women are constantly told their natural hair [is] inappropriate/unprofessional for the work place, or how young girls are told they can’t go to school with natural hair.”
“I didn’t understand that shoots like this support the very Eurocentric beauty standard that the mainstream media focus on which reinforce the idea that black features are only ok on white women,” she added.
Many people on social media shared Bador’s confusion and demanded answers from the magazine.
Keysha Davis, editor of Blackhair magazine, later released a statement thanking the model for bringing it to their attention.
She also admitted that she was not aware of Bador’s non-black heritage “prior to selecting the image”.
“We often ask PR companies/salons to submit images for the magazine, specifically stating that models must be Black or mixed race,” she said. “We can only take their word for it, and of course, try to use our own judgment.”
“We are only too aware of how black women are underrepresented in the mainstream media and the last thing we want to do is add to our erasure,” she added.
But many people were not too pleased with the response, and were shocked to hear that the magazine claimed not to be aware of the racial background of the models it uses on its front cover.
Bador also said she regrets being on the cover of Blackhair magazine, and apologises that the opportunity was “taken away from a black woman”.
“I didn’t understand that as a white passing woman I’d be praised for this hair,” she said. “But if I was a black woman I’d be persecuted.”
4. Jimmy Connors Misprint NY Times Magazine 1979
Unfortunately, however, tennis stars are not the most popular kids on the sports entertainment block, so the market for this item is smaller than it would be if the Times had spelled Mickey Mantle's name wrong. Still, it's unique to see such a major figure like Jimmy Connors have his name spelled incorrectly in a prominent publication.
Often when rifling through a large pile of old newspapers, it's hard to spot a cover with an error like this one. That's why collectible covers like these continue to be thrown away, even today. Someone charged with sorting through a pile of old newspapers must be aware that such a cover exists--prior to digging--if it is to be separated from the countless issues with virtually no collectible value.
5. Oprah's Head, Ann-Margaret's Body: A Brief History of Pre-Photoshop Fakery
Photoshop was invented in 1987 and widely distributed, for the first time, in 1990; the TV Guide debacle would mark one of the last times that art editors had to physically splice images to create new manipulations. But a lack of Photoshop, while the software ushered in our present age of doctored photography, did nothing to stop would-be fakers from their, er, fauxtography.
6. Prince William's thinning hair gets the airbrush treatment for cover of Hello!
Prince William has found himself in a hairy situation.
The British royal, 27, appears on the new cover of Hello! Magazine with a suspicious head of full, dark hair, a far cry from his usual thinning mane.
While it looks as though the prince dyed his hair, inside images prove the cover photo may have been the result of some clever lighting or avid Photoshopping.
William sports his traditional dark blond locks in additional photos found inside the British tabloid, the Daily Mail reports.
Marking the first time the heir has taken part in a nonprofessional photo shoot, William posed for photographer Jeff Hubbard, a 53-year-old former drug addict who was saved by the British charity, Crisis.
The organization reportedly convinced William to pose for the photograph, which will be auctioned off for charity. Money from the sale of the photos to Hello! will also go to the charity.
Hubbard says he was honored to work with the prince in an effort to raise funds for the organization that saved him.
"I didn't sleep at all the night before and felt very worried about the immensity of the task," Hubbard said of the January shoot taken in a London studio. "When Prince William arrived, I sensed he was a little nervous, too. I showed him the camera we were going to use and once the shoot started we chatted away. I completely forgot who he was."
He added, "He is a very nice guy and incredibly natural, and that put me at my ease."
7. This magazine's morto Photoshop fail makes it look like Olivia Munn has a giant head
She was being interviewed her self-acceptance and her continued success.
But the Photoshop job they did on her was absolutely mortifying.
Poor Olivia’s head is about twice its normal size and her right hand looms over her in a rather disturbing way.
Basically, it looks like her body has been shrunk down to half its normal size. Despite the comic obviousness of the error and the fact that it came out in January, it was only yesterday that it was picked up on and went viral.
Once it was posted to Reddit, under the title “The latest in “bad Photoshop” and “unrealistic body image” comes to us courtesy of Olivia Munn’s giant head on the cover of WebMD” the image has jumped to over 2 million views in less than 24 hours.
The comments were relentless:
I love the “Weight loss mysteries explained” title next to her. Photoshop. Her weight loss was caused by Photoshop. Mystery solved!Piss taking of bad Photoshop at its finest:
Is this year’s Human Bobblehead issue out already?And more problems were picked up on instantly:
she’s also missing one boob
8. Blundering Where Magazine designers accidentally brand cover model 'Whore' by covering part of the first 'E' with her head
A magazine has sparked ridicule due to the unfortunate layout of some of its cover images.
Designers of Where, a tourist guide published in cities across the U.S. and around the world, have obscured part of the first 'E' in the title lettering with the head of its cover model.
The result is that one might assume the name of the magazine is 'Whore', rather than 'Where'.
The reader could also be mislead into thinking that the cover model is not a wholesome, tourist-friendly figure, but something else entirely.
The error appears on the cover of two editions of the magazine; the new fall 2012 Orange County issue, and the January 2012 Milan issue.
The Phoenix & Scottsdale September 2012 edition narrowly avoided making the same mistake, obscuring a different part of the letter 'E' - one side, rather than the lower half.
Designers of the Chicago edition made the wisest choice though, laying the words over the model, rather than the other way around.
The blunder was first noticed by Buzzfeed and AdWeek. The latter pointed out that the Orange County issue cover has not been published on its page on the Where Magazine website, unlike the pages of its sister editions which proudly display the latest issue.
MSN commented: 'It’s rather unfortunate that whoever did “last looks” down at the publisher’s didn’t have a dirty enough mind to notice how crucial that first “e” was to the cover.'
Bitterwallet added: 'If you had a magazine called ‘Where’, you might want to be a little more careful about where you place your cover star or else you may end up sending out a very different message altogether.
9. Rolling Stone's Julia Louis-Dreyfus cover features flawed US Constitution
|Julia Louis-Dreyfus sports the preamble of the U.S Constitution and nothing else on the cover of Rolling Stone — well, nothing else but John Hancock’s signature below the Constitution, a document he didn’t sign. (ROLLING STONE)|
The cover of the storied rock magazine’s latest issue features a naked Julia Louis-Dreyfus with a faulty U.S. Constitution inked on her back.
Just above her derriere sits the signature of one of the nation’s most prominent Founding Fathers, John Hancock.
There’s only one problem, however: John Hancock didn’t sign the U.S. Constitution.
Hancock, president of the Second Continental Congress, actually signed the Declaration of Independence.
His autograph on that document is so stylish and large, in fact, that it inspired the use of his full name as a synonym for the word signature.
The error was first noticed by Rolling Stone readers on Twitter.
“Pro tip: John Hancock didn’t sign the Constitution,” one fan wrote.
“How did Rolling Stone make such a huge blunder?” another tweeted.
A representative for the magazine explained that the mishap was a result of not being able to fit the Declaration of Independence into the tattoo image.
“The Declaration of the Independence is on the other side but we couldn’t fit in all the signatures,” Wenner Media Publicity Director Melissa Bruno said about the issue, which hits newsstands April 11.
Louis-Dreyfus, on the other hand, acknowledged the magazine’s error in comical stride.
“Hancock signed Dec. of Independence NOT Constitution. Yet another Mike f--k-up. Dummy,” the “Veep” star tweeted, referencing her character’s public relations flak on the show.
10. The Biggest Photoshop Fails of All Time
Spanish magazine Tentaciones featured Lena Dunham on their cover in March 2016. The Girls creator and actress called out the publication for slimming down her curvy figure, writing on Instagram that "the magazine has done more than the average photoshop."
She later apologized for overreacting in a follow-up post: "I look great. But it's a weird feeling to see a photo and not know if it's your own body anymore (and I'm pretty sure that will never be my thigh width but I honestly can't tell what's been slimmed and what hasn't.) I'm not blaming anyone (y'know, except society at large.)"