Playboy’s decision earlier this month to jettison the nude images in its print edition lays bare the magazine’s own naked truth: it was always really a lifestyle magazine, with nudes simply acting as window dressing.
If it seems counterintuitive for a quasi-smut mag to renounce its own seeming raison d’etre, it’s important to remember that the magazine, since its inception, always held itself at a distance from the world of pornography.
The aspiration of Hugh Hefner’s project was cultural legitimacy – not a globally recognized logo (today, more profitable than the magazine itself), nor the cultivation of a “girl next door” image.
The magazine – at least, how it presented itself – was simply too classy to be confused for porn.
Look no further than Playboy’s debut issue, which featured Marilyn Monroe on the cover.
Its famous opening manifesto announced: “If you’re a man between the ages of 18 and 80, Playboy is meant for you.” Their “articles, fiction, picture stories, cartoons, humor” would all be culled to “form a pleasure-primer styled to the masculine taste.”
Before Playboy, other magazines did feature nude photos, but they were seen as culturally lowbrow: tawdry publications for unsophisticated readers. Other magazines, most notably Esquire, would position scantily clad women next to articles on food, style and other central features of the developing consumer culture, but not quite as boldly as Hefner’s iconic centerfolds.
Still, Playboy treated its own nudity as playful and passé. While it did occupy the “centerfold,” it was packaged as simply another accoutrement of the modern man’s cultural repertoire, which included knowledge of proper cocktail proportions and the finer points of the Miles Davis discography.
Advertisement
The crusade against smut
Playboy’s debut came just one year before America’s moral panic over smut came to a head.
The House Select Committee on Current Pornographic Materials led the charge with a December 1952 report that highlighted “cheesecake” and “girlie” magazines, crime comics for children and, particularly, the burgeoning genre of lesbian pulp fiction novels, which – as the committee wrote in prose befitting its own targets – were “filled with sordid, filthy statements based upon sexual deviations and perversions.”
Yet even in the midst of this frenzied postwar moral righteousness, Playboy eased comfortably into the mainstream.
A few years later, when Democratic Senator Estes Kefauver launched his own anti-porn crusade, Playboy remained conspicuously absent from the hearings, which drew headlines like The New York Times’ “Smut Held Cause of Delinquency.”
Possessing presidential aspirations (and finely attuned to the optics of media spectacle, having pioneered televised hearings in his earlier investigations of organized crime), Kefauver decided against subpoenaing Hefner.
Instead, he tacitly pandered to anti-Semitic sentiment by forcefully grilling a predominantly Jewish group of erotic distributors. The white-bread Hefner remained above the fray while smut peddlers like Abraham Rubin, Edward Mishkin and Samuel Roth reluctantly testified before Congress. (Roth would suffer the most, spending five years in federal prison for distributing material not substantially different from Hefner’s. His case also led to the 1957 Supreme Court precedent that still undergirds modern obscenity law.)
‘Skirting’ trouble
If Playboy emerged remarkably unscathed from these sexual-political skirmishes, Hefner nonetheless stayed perpetually cautious, calibrating the magazine to fit shifting contexts.
The pubic hair battles with Penthouse in the early 1970s – when Playboy started publishing more graphic images to compete in the expanding adult market – are most famous. But less remembered are earlier adjustments Hefner made to dissociate Playboy from cultural riffraff.
When Time covered the “horde of [Playboy] imitators yipping after pay dirt” in April 1957, it noted that new nude magazines like Caper, Nugget and Rogue were outpacing Playboy in “the smirk, the leer, and the female torso.”
Yet rather going skin-for-skin with its competitors, Playboy tried to distinguish itself through topnotch fiction and journalism (as well as science fiction, as PhD candidate Jordan Carroll notes in his recent study of the magazine).
Advertisement
According to Time, Playboy ultimately found that the most “effective censor was success”; in response to growing readership and ad revenue, the magazine “toned down its gags and dressed up its girls.”
Indeed, in one striking 1962 letter sent to Hefner by a suburban Chicago chapter of the conservative Citizens for Decent Literature, the group happily informed him that that it had decided not to include Playboy among its list of 37 magazines that should be removed from local newsstands.
Later, in the 1970s, Playboy would attempt to compete with the more graphic pornography unleashed by the sexual revolution and the weakening of obscenity laws. More recently, it has reshaped its content to adhere to the strict regulations of social media sites like Facebook and Instagram, which forbid users from posting female (but not male) nipples.
Clearly, 2015 is not the first time Playboy has switched up its strategy to respond to market forces.
The bunny supplants the girl next door
If Hefner’s erotic vision was quaint enough to pass muster even with some conservatives in the early 1960s, today it’s as retrograde as Don Draper. As Washington Post columnist Mireille Miller-Young observes, today’s girl next door isn’t uniformly white, thin, heterosexual and presented with a smarmy editorial voice. Instead, she could be a queer woman of color. She might even be publishing her own porn.
While the magazine once walked a tightrope between smut and sophistication, branding always remained Playboy’s real strength.
Today, 40% of its revenue comes from China – where the magazine itself isn’t even sold. Instead, a recognizable bunny logo that appears on products ranging from cigarette lighters to coffee mugs is what persists.
With limitless free online nudity a click away, the cash flow resides in a licensed logo that represents an upwardly mobile, urban lifestyle – much like it always did.
STM Daily News is a vibrant news blog dedicated to sharing the brighter side of human experiences. Emphasizing positive, uplifting stories, the site focuses on delivering inspiring, informative, and well-researched content. With a commitment to accurate, fair, and responsible journalism, STM Daily News aims to foster a community of readers passionate about positive change and engaged in meaningful conversations. Join the movement and explore stories that celebrate the positive impacts shaping our world.
Meet Irene Curie, the Nobel-winning atomic physicist who changed the course of modern cancer treatment
Artemis Spyrou, Michigan State University and Andrea Richard, Ohio University The adage goes “like mother like daughter,” and in the case of Irene Joliot-Curie, truer words were never spoken. She was the daughter of two Nobel Prize laureates, Marie Curie and Pierre Curie, and was herself awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 1935 together with her husband, Frederic Joliot. While her parents received the prize for the discovery of natural radioactivity, Irene’s prize was for the synthesis of artificial radioactivity. This discovery changed many fields of science and many aspects of our everyday lives. Artificial radioactivity is used today in medicine, agriculture, energy production, food sterilization, industrial quality control and more.Frederic Joliot and Irene Joliot-Curie.Wellcome Collection, CC BY We are two nuclear physicistswho perform experiments at different accelerator facilities around the world. Irene’s discovery laid the foundation for our experimental studies, which use artificial radioactivity to understand questions related to astrophysics, energy, medicine and more.
Early years and battlefield training
Irene Curie was born in Paris, France, in 1897. In an unusual schooling setup, Irene was one of a group of children taught by their academic parents, including her own by then famous mother, Marie Curie.Marie Curie and her daughter Irene were both scientists studying radioactivity.Wellcome Collection, CC BY World War I started in 1914, when Irene was only 17, and she interrupted her studies to help her mother find fragments of bombs in wounded soldiers using portable X-ray machines. She soon became an expert in these wartime radiology techniques, and on top of performing the measurements herself, she also spent time training nurses to use the X-ray machines. After the war, Irene went back to her studies in her mother’s lab at the Radium Institute. This is where she met fellow researcher Frederic Joliot, whom she later married. The two worked together on many projects, which led them to their major breakthrough in 1934.
A radioactive discovery
Isotopes are variations of a particular element that have the same number of protons – positively charged particles – and different numbers of neutrons, which are particles with no charge. While some isotopes are stable, the majority are radioactive and called radioisotopes. These radioisotopes spontaneously transform into different elements and release radiation – energetic particles or light – in a process called radioactive decay. At the time of Irene and Frederic’s discovery, the only known radioactive isotopes came from natural ores, through a costly and extremely time-consuming process. Marie and Pierre Curie had spent years studying the natural radioactivity in tons of uranium ores. In Irene and Frederic’s experiments, they bombarded aluminum samples with alpha particles, which consist of two protons and two neutrons bound together – they are atomic nuclei of the isotope helium-4. In previous studies, they had observed the different types of radiation their samples emitted while being bombarded. The radiation would cease when they took away the source of alpha particles. In the aluminum experiment, however, they noticed that even after they removed the alpha source, they could still detect radiation. The amount of radiation decreased by half every three minutes, and they concluded that the radiation came from the decay of a radioisotope of the element phosphorus. Phosphorus has two additional protons compared to aluminum and was formed when the alpha particles fused with the aluminum nuclei. This was the first identification of an artificially made radioisotope, phosphorus-30. Because phosphorus-30 was created after bombarding aluminum with alpha particles – rather than occurring in its natural state – Irene and Frederic induced the radioactivity. So, it is called artificial radioactivity.In Irene and Frederic’s experiments, an isotope of aluminum was hit with an alpha particle (two neutrons and two protons bound together). The collision resulted in two protons and a neutron from the alpha particle binding to the aluminum, making it an isotope of phosphorus, which decayed, releasing a particle called a positron.Artemis Spyrou After her major discovery, Irene stayed active not only in research but in activism and politics as well. In 1936, almost a decade before women gained the right to vote in France, she was appointed under secretary of state for scientific research. In this position, she laid the foundations for what would become the National Centre for Scientific Research, which is the French equivalent of the U.S. National Science Foundation or National Institutes of Health. She co-created the French Atomic Energy Commission in 1945 and held a six-year term, promoting nuclear research and development of the first French nuclear reactor. She later became director of the Curie Laboratory at the Radium Institute and a professor at the Faculty of Science in Paris.
Medical uses of artificial radioactivity
The Joliot-Curie discovery opened the road to the extensive use of radioisotopes in medical applications. Today, radioactive iodine is used regularly to treat thyroid diseases. Radioisotopes that emit positrons – the positive equivalent of the electron – are used in medical PET scans to image and diagnose cancer, and others are used for cancer therapy. To diagnose cancer, practitioners can inject a small amount of the radioisotope into the body, where it accumulates at specific organs. Specialized devices such as a PET scanner can then detect the radioactivity from the outside. This way, doctors can visualize how these organs are working without the need for surgery. To then treat cancer, practitioners use large amounts of radiation to kill the cancer cells. They try to localize the application of the radioisotope to just where the cancer is so that they’re only minimally affecting healthy tissue.
An enduring legacy
In the 90 years since the Joliot-Curie discovery of the first artificial radioisotope, the field of nuclear science has expanded its reach to roughly 3,000 artificial radioisotopes, from hydrogen to the heaviest known element, oganesson. However, nuclear theories predict that up to 7,000 artificial radioisotopes are possible. As physicists, we work with data from a new facility at Michigan State University, the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams, which is expected to discover up to 1,000 new radioisotopes.Scientists graph the known isotopes in the chart of nuclei. They have discovered roughly 3,000 radioisotopes (shown with cyan boxes) and predict the existence of another 4,000 radioisotopes (shown with gray boxes).Facility for Rare Isotope Beams While the Joliot-Curies were bombarding their samples with alpha particles at relatively low speeds, the Michigan State facility can accelerate stable isotopes up to half the speed of light and smash them on a target to produce new radioisotopes. Scientists using the facility have already discovered five new radioisotopes since it began operating in 2022, and the search continues. Each of the thousands of available radioisotopes has a different set of properties. They live for different amounts of time and emit different types of radiation and amounts of energy. This variability allows scientists to choose the right isotope for the right application. Iodine, for example, has more than 40 known radioisotopes. A main characteristic of radioisotopes is their half-life, meaning the amount of time it takes for half of the isotopes in the sample to transform into a new element. Iodine radioisotopes have half-lives that span from a tenth of a second to 16 million years. But not all of them are useful, practical or safe for thyroid treatment.The iodine radioisotope used in cancer therapy has a half-life of eight days. Eight days is long enough to kill cancer cells in the body, but not so long that the radioactivity poses a long-term threat to the patient and those around them.Artemis Spyrou Radioisotopes that live for a few seconds don’t exist long enough to perform medical procedures, and radioisotopes that live for years would harm the patient and their family. Because it lives for a few days, iodine-131 is the preferred medical radioisotope. Artificial radioactivity can also help scientists study the universe’s mysteries. For example, stars are fueled by nuclear reactions and radioactive decay in their cores. In violent stellar events, such as when a star explodes at the end of its life, they produce thousands of different radioisotopes that can drive the explosion. For this reason, scientists, including the two of us. produce and study in the lab the radioisotopes found in stars. With the advent of the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams and other accelerator facilities, the search for new radioisotopes will continue opening doors to a world of possibilities. Artemis Spyrou, Professor of Nuclear Physics, Michigan State University and Andrea Richard, Assistant Professor of Physics and Astronomy, Ohio University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
A Short-Form Series from The Knowledge by STM Daily News
Every Friday, STM Daily News shines a light on brilliant minds history overlooked.
Forgotten Genius Fridays is a weekly collection of short videos and articles dedicated to inventors, innovators, scientists, and creators whose impact changed the world—but whose names were often left out of the textbooks.
From life-saving inventions and cultural breakthroughs to game-changing ideas buried by bias, our series digs up the truth behind the minds that mattered.
Each episode of The Knowledge runs 30–90 seconds, designed for curious minds on the go—perfect for YouTube Shorts, TikTok, Reels, and quick reads.
Because remembering these stories isn’t just about the past—it’s about restoring credit where it’s long overdue.
Disclosure Day: Why Spielberg’s New UFO Film Has My Attention
The upcoming movie “Disclosure Day,” directed by Steven Spielberg and written by David Koepp, is highly anticipated for its exploration of sci-fi themes involving UFOs and aliens. Scheduled for a June 12, 2026 release, it features a strong cast, including Emily Blunt, and is expected to deliver a blend of wonder and emotion, reminiscent of Spielberg’s iconic films.
If there is one upcoming movie I am genuinely excited about, it is Disclosure Day. As someone who has been fascinated by science fiction, aliens, UFOs, and space since I was a little kid, this one feels like it is landing right in my wheelhouse. Add Steven Spielberg to the mix, and it becomes even more personal. Spielberg’s work helped shape the way a lot of us look at wonder, fear, and the unknown. For me, films like Close Encounters of the Third Kind, E.T., Jaws, and Duel were not just movies. They were experiences.
Image Credit: Universal Pictures
That is why Disclosure Day already feels like one of the most intriguing releases on the 2026 calendar. Directed by Spielberg and written by David Koepp from a story by Spielberg, the film brings together a strong cast that includes Emily Blunt, Josh O’Connor, Colin Firth, Eve Hewson, Colman Domingo, and Wyatt Russell. Blunt is reportedly playing a Kansas City TV meteorologist, which immediately adds an interesting angle for a story tied to mystery and possible extraterrestrial themes.
Disclosure Day | Official Trailer
What makes this project especially exciting is the creative team behind it. Spielberg returning to UFO territory is enough to get longtime sci-fi fans paying attention, and Koepp’s involvement adds another layer of anticipation. The film was first reported in April 2024 as Spielberg’s next project, with Universal Pictures later confirmed as distributor. Production took place from February through May 2025, with filming in New York, New Jersey, and Atlanta under the working title Non-View.
The supporting details only make it more interesting. John Williams is set to compose the score, marking yet another collaboration with Spielberg. That alone gives the film a sense of event-level importance. Williams and Spielberg have created some of the most unforgettable moments in movie history together, and for a film centered on mystery and awe, that musical partnership matters.
Right now, Disclosure Day is scheduled to hit theaters in the United States on June 12, 2026, with an IMAX release planned as well. It was originally dated for May 15, 2026, but the move to June only builds the summer blockbuster feel around it. Based on everything we know so far, this looks like a film that could blend spectacle, emotion, and that classic Spielberg sense of wonder.
From my perspective, this is exactly the kind of movie I want to follow closely. I have always been drawn to stories about what might be out there, what we do not understand yet, and how ordinary people react when the impossible suddenly feels real. Spielberg has explored those ideas before in ways that stay with you, and I am curious to see how Disclosure Day adds to that legacy.
I will be keeping an eye on this one and updating readers as more information comes out, from trailers and story details to cast insights and release coverage, all the way up to premiere day. For sci-fi fans, UFO believers, and anyone who still feels that pull of the unknown, this is a movie worth watching.
Looking for an entertainment experience that transcends the ordinary? Look no further than STM Daily News Blog’s vibrant Entertainment section. Immerse yourself in the captivating world of indie films, streaming and podcasts, movie reviews, music, expos, venues, and theme and amusement parks. Discover hidden cinematic gems, binge-worthy series and addictive podcasts, gain insights into the latest releases with our movie reviews, explore the latest trends in music, dive into the vibrant atmosphere of expos, and embark on thrilling adventures in breathtaking venues and theme parks. Join us at STM Entertainment and let your entertainment journey begin! https://stmdailynews.com/category/entertainment/
We’re only halfway through 2023, and it feels already like the year of alien contact.
In February, President Joe Biden gave orders to shoot down three unidentified aerial phenomena – NASA’s title for UFOs. Then, the alleged leaked footage from a Navy pilot of a UFO, and then news of a whistleblower’s report on a possible U.S. government cover-up about UFO research. Most recently, an independent analysis published in June suggests that UFOs might have been collected by a clandestine agency of the U.S. government.
If any actual evidence of extraterrestrial life emerges, whether from whistleblower testimony or an admission of a cover-up, humans would face a historic paradigm shift.
As members of an Indigenous studies working group who were asked to lend our disciplinary expertise to a workshop affiliated with the Berkeley SETI Research Center, we have studied centuries of culture contacts and their outcomes from around the globe. Our collaborative preparations for the workshop drew from transdisciplinary research in Australia, New Zealand, Africa and across the Americas.
In its final form, our group statement illustrated the need for diverse perspectives on the ethics of listening for alien life and a broadening of what defines “intelligence” and “life.” Based on our findings, we consider first contact less as an event and more as a long process that has already begun.
Who’s in charge of first contact
The question of who is “in charge” of preparing for contact with alien life immediately comes to mind. The communities – and their interpretive lenses – most likely to engage in any contact scenario would be military, corporate and scientific.
By giving Americans the legal right to profit from space tourism and planetary resource extraction, the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act of 2015 could mean that corporations will be the first to find signs of extraterrestrial societies. Otherwise, while detecting unidentified aerial phenomena is usually a military matter, and NASA takes the lead on sending messages from Earth, most activities around extraterrestrial communications and evidence fall to a program called SETI, or the search for extraterrestrial intelligence.
SETI investigators are virtually always STEM – science, technology, engineering and math – scholars. Few in the social science and humanities fields have been afforded opportunities to contribute to concepts of and preparations for contact.
In a promising act of disciplinary inclusion, the Berkeley SETI Research Center in 2018 invited working groups – including our Indigenous studies working group – from outside STEM fields to craft perspective papers for SETI scientists to consider.
Ethics of listening
Neither Breakthough Listen nor SETI’s site features a current statement of ethics beyond a commitment to transparency. Our working group was not the first to raise this issue. And while the SETI Institute and certain research centers have included ethics in their event programming, it seems relevant to ask who NASA and SETI answer to, and what ethical guidelines they’re following for a potential first contact scenario.
SETI’s Post-Detection Hub – another rare exception to SETI’s STEM-centrism – seems the most likely to develop a range of contact scenarios. The possible circumstances imagined include finding ET artifacts, detecting signals from thousands of light years away, dealing with linguistic incompatibility, finding microbial organisms in space or on other planets, and biological contamination of either their or our species. Whether the U.S. government or heads of military would heed these scenarios is another matter.
SETI-affiliated scholars tend to reassure critics that the intentions of those listening for technosignatures are benevolent, since “what harm could come from simply listening?” The chair emeritus of SETI Research, Jill Tarter, defended listening because any ET civilization would perceive our listening techniques as immature or elementary.
But our working group drew upon the history of colonial contacts to show the dangers of thinking that whole civilizations are comparatively advanced or intelligent. For example, when Christopher Columbus and other European explorers came to the Americas, those relationships were shaped by the preconceived notion that the “Indians” were less advanced due to their lack of writing. This led to decades of Indigenous servitude in the Americas.This 16th century engraving shows Christopher Columbus landing in the Americas, where he and his explorers deemed the Indigenous people there as ‘primitive,’ as they had no writing system. Theodor de Bry/Wikimedia Commons
The working group statement also suggested that the act of listening is itself already within a “phase of contact.” Like colonialism itself, contact might best be thought of as a series of events that starts with planning, rather than a singular event. Seen this way, isn’t listening potentially without permission just another form of surveillance? To listen intently but indiscriminately seemed to our working group like a type of eavesdropping.
It seems contradictory that we begin our relations with aliens by listening in without their permission while actively working to stop other countries from listening to certain U.S. communications. If humans are initially perceived as disrespectful or careless, ET contact could more likely lead to their colonization of us.
Histories of contact
Throughout histories of Western colonization, even in those few cases when contactees were intended to be protected, contact has led to brutal violence, pandemics, enslavement and genocide.
James Cook’s 1768 voyage on the HMS Endeavor was initiated by the Royal Society. This prestigious British academic society charged him with calculating the solar distance between the Earth and the Sun by measuring the visible movement of Venus across the Sun from Tahiti. The society strictly forbade him from any colonial engagements.
Though he achieved his scientific goals, Cook also received orders from the Crown to map and claim as much territory as possible on the return voyage. Cook’s actions put into motion wide-scale colonization and Indigenous dispossession across Oceania, including the violent conquests of Australia and New Zealand.
The Royal Society gave Cook a “prime directive” of doing no harm and to only conduct research that would broadly benefit humanity. However, explorers are rarely independent from their funders, and their explorations reflect the political contexts of their time.
As scholars attuned to both research ethics and histories of colonialism, we wrote about Cook in our working group statement to showcase why SETI might want to explicitly disentangle their intentions from those of corporations, the military and the government.
Although separated by vast time and space, both Cook’s voyage and SETI share key qualities, including their appeal to celestial science in the service of all humanity. They also share a mismatch between their ethical protocols and the likely long-term impacts of their success. https://www.youtube.com/embed/5gZwLGrJQrM?wmode=transparent&start=0 This BBC video describes the modern ramifications of Captain James Cook’s colonial legacy in New Zealand.
The initial domino of a public ET message, or recovered bodies or ships, could initiate cascading events, including military actions, corporate resource mining and perhaps even geopolitical reorganizing. The history of imperialism and colonialism on Earth illustrates that not everyone benefits from colonization. No one can know for sure how engagement with extraterrestrials would go, though it’s better to consider cautionary tales from Earth’s own history sooner rather than later.
This article has been updated to correct the date of James Cook’s voyage.
The science section of our news blog STM Daily News provides readers with captivating and up-to-date information on the latest scientific discoveries, breakthroughs, and innovations across various fields. We offer engaging and accessible content, ensuring that readers with different levels of scientific knowledge can stay informed. Whether it’s exploring advancements in medicine, astronomy, technology, or environmental sciences, our science section strives to shed light on the intriguing world of scientific exploration and its profound impact on our daily lives. From thought-provoking articles to informative interviews with experts in the field, STM Daily News Science offers a harmonious blend of factual reporting, analysis, and exploration, making it a go-to source for science enthusiasts and curious minds alike. https://stmdailynews.com/category/science/
