Three firms in Ohio refused to print Kent State's gay student publication, but getting a straight answer as to why hasn't been easy. The spring 2010 issue of Fusion, published a year ago, depicted partial male nudity on its back cover and in a six-page spread inside, yet this time a photo of bulge in a leotard was deemed too "graphic." (A fourth printer ended up printing the magazine, but charged $2,200 to rush it through.) Read about the controversy
HERE.
A six-page spread in last year's spring issue of Fusion featured "Boys in Bottoms." The issue's publisher, Freeport Press Inc., said it published the images in error.
Three firms in Ohio refused to print Kent State's gay student publication, but getting a straight answer as to why hasn't been easy. The spring 2010 issue of Fusion, published a year ago, depicted partial male nudity on its back cover and in a six-page spread inside, yet this time a photo of bulge in a leotard was deemed too "graphic." (A fourth printer ended up printing the magazine, but charged $2,200 to rush it through.) Read about the controversy HERE.
A six-page spread in last year's spring issue of Fusion featured "Boys in Bottoms." The issue's publisher, Freeport Press Inc., said it published the images in error.
No comments:
Post a Comment