All The Ashley Alexandra Dupré That Fits To Print

Thank goodness, with everything else going on, The NYT is managing to stay abreast of Ashley Dupré.  So, what's your take?  Do you think the trashy shot they published from Ashley's MySpace page is more reflective of the woman who did you-know-what with Governor you-know-who, or do you prefer the other one, the girl-next-door?

For an Aspiring Singer, a Harsher Spotlight (NYT)
Can Spitzer Call Girl Cash In? (NYT)
Report: Spitzer Call Girl Identified (NYT)
Magazines to Spitzer Call Girl: Call Us (NYT)
Times Topic Page: Ashley Alexandra Dupré (NYT)

Which reminds me, we never got around to talking about this....

Shooting Britney (Atlantic.com)
Atlantic Assures Fans It Hasn't Sold Its Soul (Ad Age)

(image 1, 2: Ashley Alexandra Dupré, MySpace. image 3: X17 for The Atlantic)

Comments

[Wayne Dickson]

Re the Ashley pix, I'd say she's presenting herself in both pictures as she wants to be perceived by persons whose opinion matters to her. I'm closer to the implied audience for the picture on the right, for sure.

But the game is not completely fair. First, she seems younger in the picture on the right and seems not yet to have had her nose fixed. Second, you fudged, Mike! :-) In a sense you're asking, "Which kind of woman appeals more to you: a trashy call girl or a nice girl next door?" You didn't allow the pictures to speak for themselves.

Re the Atlantic cover, my immediate thought was this: "The formerly rational and intellectually respectable journal has sold its soul." First one spots the photo of Spears and the title "Britney Show." (Or perhaps reverse order, given the color and size of the type.) Then a reference to paparazzi, followed by Hollywood. Only those who take some trouble see at the very top reference to stories dealing with social, economic, and national security issues. Is this "new" Atlantic meant to appeal to the hypocrisy reflected in the comment, "Yes, I subscribe to PlayBoy--but only for the articles." Right.

Then, ironically, after reading down I saw the link to the AdAge article! I clicked on that link, and I'm glad I did. For those who haven't yet checked it out, here's the way it begins:

Atlantic Assures Fans It Hasn't Sold Its Soul

Britney Cover Is Relevant to Venerable Title's New Aims -- a Hoped-for Return to Profitability

If you've abandoned or at least subsumed sophisticated, socially responsible writing to the desire for profit, then you have indeed betrayed your heritage and sold your soul. You have become a poster child for Mammon. (I can't help thinking back to how such "new aims" destroyed the once wonderful Saturday Review.)

[brkily]

how timely and convenient, for some, that the only public servant willing to stand up to wall street's greed and corruption has been taken out... hmmm

[maureenh]

I thought it was interesting for an article that was supposedly about the new paparazzi, the cover shot was only Britney- how hard would it have been to find a photo of all the (apparently terrifying) paparazzi chasing her? The article was like a study in how no one is immune from celebrity worship, not even those who are writing critical articles on it.

[Rich]

Gotta say, like anyone else of my gender, age and preference (Male, nearing 50 and straight) I surely did appreciate the pictures of Ashley Dupre, but yeah, what WAS the news value of those photos?

[chuck]

The girl next door - definitely!

[anonymous]

The "Daily News" had a different cover photo of Ashley over the weekend, very somber. If you read a little bit of what people who work with prostitutes have to say, it isn't glamourous, it's awful, no matter how much she gets paid. So these pix strike me as p.r. for something or someone who doesn't want reality.