List of All Articles with Tag 'a'

NEW DELHI--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sep 21, 2023--

SEOUL, South Korea--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sep 21, 2023--

Cindy Crawford has explained why she posed nude for Playboy magazine in 1988, even after her agents told her not to. The supermodel, 57, reflected on the early days of her career in the new Apple TV+ docuseries, The Super Models, which she appears in alongside fashion icons Naomi Campbell, Linda Evangelista and Christy Turlington. During the second episode of the show, Crawford noted that, after becoming the face of Revlon in the 80s, “things started really happening,” as she was “doing the right campaigns”. However, she claimed that when she was asked to appear on the cover of Playboy in 1988, some of her peers and agents advised her against it. “Everyone in my life at the time thought I shouldn’t do Playboy,” she said. “My modelling agency didn’t feel that that fit into the types of jobs I should be doing. I think the brand still had a connotation to it that maybe scared some people off.” Crawford said she knew why her agency was hesitant about on the gig, given how different it was from jobs she’d had before. “I understood the platform of Playboy and what that symbolised,” she explained. “It was definitely outside the normal trajectory for a Vogue model at the time.” She went on to specify that a famous fashion photographer, the late Herb Ritts, was the one who reached out to her about the project. After she recalled that she and Ritts were “really good friends” and that she “worked with” him a lot and previously “stayed at his house,” she shared another reason why she wanted to pose for Playboy. “I don’t know, there was just something about it that intrigued me. So against the advice of my agents, I said ‘yes,’” Crawford said, before describing the conditions she brought up to the maagazine when taking on the job. “But I said: ‘You don’t need to pay me a lot of money. As long as I can have control of the images, and I wanted the right to kill the story if I don’t like it,’” she recalled telling the publication. Crawford noted that when she did the photoshoot for Playboy, she and Ritts “combined it with another trip that [they] were doing for French Vogue to Hawaii”. And, according to the supermodel, the two photoshoots weren’t all that different from each other. “We’d shoot a picture for French Vogue and then we’d shoot a picture for Playboy,” she said. “I mean, you almost couldn’t tell which pictures were for French Vogue and which pictures were for Playboy, it was very organic and I loved them.” The actor concluded by noting that, despite what other people may think, it was ultimately her decision to pose for Playboy, and she did not feel pressured into it. “That’s the whole thing for me is, even if I make choices that other people disagree with or don’t like, if they’re my decisions and I have control of it, that’s empowering to me,” she said. “Even if it’s doing Playboy. I never felt like a victim of that decision.” This isn’t Crawford’s first time opening up about posing for the magazine. During an interview with Net-a-Porter’s PorterEdit in 2019, she acknowledged that she didn’t have any regrets about being photographed nude for the publication twice, as she also appeared in a 1998 Playboy spread. “I look back at some of my old Playboy pictures and I think: ‘Why wasn’t I walking around naked all the time?’” she said. “I’m not getting younger. So I want to celebrate who I am today.” She also opened up about posing nude in her fifties, and shared the candid reason why she did so in photographer Russell James’ book, Angels. “Part of the reason I wanted to do it was that I thought, at what age is being naked not beautiful anymore? Is there a sell-by date on us?” the model said. “I don’t look the same as I did at 20, 30 or even 40. If we take care of ourselves, why not? Am I frolicking on the beach in a string bikini? No.” Crawford continued to explain how, to her, posing nude showcases a type of beauty that isn’t typically shown in her other photoshoots. “But there is a place where I want to feel beautiful naked, in my private life, with my husband. [Russell] was tapping into that real place – not high heels, not a lot of makeup, not coy, just a real woman who doesn’t have clothes on,” she said. Read More Cindy Crawford candidly speaks about her marriage to Richard Gere 30 years later Voguewashing London Fashion Week won’t pay the wages of Britain’s young fashion designers Groping, abuse and racism: 10 of the most shocking revelations from The Super Models TV show

BANGKOK (Reuters) -Thailand's new Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin said on Thursday he met with Tesla chief Elon Musk in New

Hollywood studios and striking screenwriters are resuming negotiations for the second day in a row Thursday

Researchers working at a cave in southern Spain have found evidence that the skeletal remains of ancient humans buried there were dug up, modified and even used as tools by subsequent generations.

On February 5, 1958, two Air Force jets collided in mid-air during a train mission. Fortunately, all involved survived the crash, but one of the jets carried a Mark 15 thermonuclear bomb, as was "common practice" during training missions. The weapon is now believed to be hidden 13 to 55 feet below the ocean and sand, and the Air Force and Navy divers have been looking for it ever since. The nuclear weapon is somewhere off the coast of Tybee Island, Georgia, and every once in a while, a high reading of radioactivity is recorded in the area. This causes the US government to scramble in efforts to find the bomb, likely buried in the seafloor. For two months after the jets collided, the Air Force and Navy divers searched a 24-square mile area in the Wassaw Sound, a bay of the Atlantic Ocean near Savannah, using handheld sonar. On April 16 1958, the military decided the bomb was "irretrievably lost." The Air Force said the weapon wasn't fully assembled and "there was no danger of an explosion or radioactivity." Forty years later, a retired Air Force officer began to search for it. "It's this legacy of the Cold War," said Stephen Schwartz, author of 'Atomic Audit: The Costs and Consequences of US Nuclear Weapons Since 1940'. "This is kind of hanging out there as a reminder of how untidy things were and how dangerous things were." However, some experts say that the bomb may be better left buried, even if someone finds it. Whilst there was little chance of the bomb spontaneously exploding, there was a chance of it exploding during retrieval, and experts would have to remove and dispose of the uranium first. A 2001 report on the bomb suggested recovery cost would start at $5 million. "The whole Air Force perspective is, it's just not worth it," Schwartz said. "Trying to move it could create bigger problems than if we just leave it where it is." Schwartz said the only way the weapon will be found is by chance or if a powerful storm dredges it up. "I won't say it's lost for the ages because I don't think it is," he said, but "so many people have searched for it for so long using some fairly sophisticated equipment and not found it." Sign up to our free Indy100 weekly newsletter Have your say in our news democracy. Click the upvote icon at the top of the page to help raise this article through the indy100 rankings.

SALINAS, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sep 21, 2023--

By Saqib Iqbal Ahmed NEW YORK The U.S. dollar edged higher against the pound and the euro on

WASHINGTON The U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday voted to block consideration of a sweeping military funding bill

By Saqib Iqbal Ahmed NEW YORK The latest leg lower in U.S. stock prices has put them in

The moon-made-of-cheese rumor may have started with a hungry wolf and a crafty fox.