It was ever thus?
Were lads mags always rubbish or is my memory of them being witty and worth reading not quite as nostalgically rose tinted as it seems? I'm sure I used to look forward to reading the articles. I'm convinced they weren't always just soft porn. I first read about Osama Bin Laden in a lad's mag, I think it was FHM. It was an undercover report where the journalist had met with him and profiled his murderous intentions. I remember heaving with laughter at some of the captions, one about the Hulk still makes me smile: David Banner hogs the toilet while Hulk deals with a bad case of the turtle's head.
The moment when Gail Porter was splashed over the Houses of Parliament seemed to mean something when it happened back in 1999 whereas now it just looks like a tacky PR stunt. Perhaps it's just that I'm getting old. Or perhaps I'm right and there was a point when "lad's mags" were actually worth reading and not just pictures of attractive women. Not that there's anything wrong with pictures of attractive women, just that there's more to life than just that. In fact it used to annoy me when comedians such as Ben Elton would bang on about how lads mags and Baywatch were just an excuse for people to have a quick -ahem-. It's not something I've ever done, to either Baywatch or a lad's mag. I'll bet most blokes haven't either. The reason these mags aren't popular anymore is because they started to believe their own hype. They listened to their critics more than their readers. Pictures of attractive girls are fine but a few decent articles are the reason I used to part with my cash. Rant over.