Miranda Kerr’s management have spoken out about Coles’ decision to remove this month’s edition of Harper’s Bazaar from shelves, blaming Kerr’s “too raunchy” nude cover.
A representative for Kerr has criticised the supermarket group for pulling the magazine, standing up for the celebration of women’s bodies and labelling the controversial decision as a publicity stunt.
“There have been numerous examples of similar covers sold without restriction that celebrate and support women and this is no different. They seem to have used it to get publicity during the busiest trading time of the year,” Kerr’s manager Annie Kelly told Fairfax.
Earlier in the week, Coles defended their actions with this statement:
“Harper’s Bazaar is a fashion magazine, therefore, we weren’t aware that the current edition would contain nudity.
“Once we were aware, we assessed the appropriateness of this particular edition given that we are a family business. We felt the best thing to do would be to remove it from stores, therefore we issued a withdrawal.”
WATCH: Behind the scenes of Miranda’s photo shoot, filmed by Aussie director Gracie Otto. Post continues after video…
The magazine’s editor, Kellie Hush, was disappointed with the decision.
“I have had so much positive feedback from around the globe, it is a shame Coles does not also recognise the artistic integrity of this image,” she told Fairfax.
“As Gloria Steinem says: ‘The human body is not obscene’.” Hush added.
“The cover is a beautiful artistic image taken by one of Australia’s best photographers Steven Chee and I stand by that,” said Hush.
Hush bragged earlier in the month that the shot would become “iconic” in Australian fashion photography history. It’s certainly ruffled some feathers.
What do you think about Miranda Kerr’s nude cover? Tasteful or too much?
Top Comments
Get ready for the saggy mummy army to get all angry and jealous over a hot woman. Sorry ladies, but it's true!
Would that be the same supermarket management that puts condoms and lube on open display on their shelves for the kids to walk past? Let's have some consistency about appropriateness for children.
Children don't know what condoms and lube are and they are on a relatively high shelf. The magazine is much more in your face.
Because they don't know is a precondition of them asking. I was in the supermarket today and at least in that store they were no higher than some of the mags. Look, that's cool, they are legitimate and legal products to advertise, but why do people bleat about the children like Marge Flanders about the magazine and not about these?
A parent can choose to loiter near the condom and lube section or just move on. Mags are usually at the checkout or at least prominently displayed. Also the packaging on condoms etc are more subtle.