That Pig Picture Was No Fluke

We’ve seen the kind of woman that Hollywood and Details magazine deems “fat” and worthy of being represented by the image of a pig’s ass wearing heels — such noted porkers as Kristin Davis, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Rachel Weisz and a Butterfield 8-era Elizabeth Taylor.

Now, apparently Katie Couric is getting the oinker treatment by her new network — the official photo attached to the story in the network’s magazine announcing her move into the anchor chair at CBS Evening News has been doctored so that she appears to be 20 pounds lighter than she really is.

n the magazine, which is distributed at CBS stations and on American Airlines flights, Couric appears on the front dressed in a dark business suit and flashing her pearly whites.

But on an inside page, the touched-up – or rather, slimmed-downed – photo shows Couric in a striped designer dress suit standing in front of the CBS eye logo.

The original photo, which shows Couric looking more bosomy and thicker in the shoulders, waist and cheeks, was snapped in May.

Apparently, the woman pictured below is so enormous that the network that will be putting her on camera, live, every weeknight beginning Sept. 5, felt the need to airbrush out her ass because God forbid anyone see that she could crush the anchor’s chair under the weight of her massive, flabby ass:

An “overzealous” photo editor has been blamed for the airbrushing, but you can’t tell me that network standards and cultural standards and the standards that drove the Details crowd to declare this woman to be piglike didn’t have anything to do with it. Nor can I quite credit the idea that nobody at the network had editorial control over the magazine. The news division may very well have had nothing to do with it, but they’re only one part of a network that contributes to the screwed-up body images of this culture through its entertainment programming.

Similar Posts (automatically generated):

15 comments for “That Pig Picture Was No Fluke

  1. August 30, 2006 at 1:43 pm

    What the hell did they do to her jawline?!

  2. August 30, 2006 at 1:58 pm

    Yeah, I mean, what the hell was she thinking? How DARE she appear on TV and other media if her looks don’t correspond 100% to whatever latest restrictions the fashion world/editors of Details have graciously imposed?!?!?!

    That swine!

  3. August 30, 2006 at 1:59 pm

    She has dead eyes. *shiver*

  4. August 30, 2006 at 2:13 pm

    “”An “overzealous” photo editor “”

    I bet they told the editor to make Couric look sexier because you know the only way people will watch the news these days is if the anchors are beautiful. Just look at the “blonde” network CNN.

    There is something wrong with her eyes. She looks like she is on drugs. Maybe that is what they are trying to hide at CBS. I meaN ANYONE THAT SMILES LIKE THAT HAS TO BE ON SOMETHING.

    But of course I digressed and hit the caps lock key.

    It is sad that a woman who is not over weight has a photograph of her manipulated to fit an “ideal”. Perhaps CBS is tired of being called the old people’s network. Look out David Letterman you are about to get fired!

  5. August 30, 2006 at 2:51 pm

    Look out David Letterman you are about to get fired!

    The Davester can get as old as he wants; he’s a dude.

  6. August 30, 2006 at 2:56 pm

    Christ. DO they alter pictures of Chris Matthews?

  7. Regina
    August 30, 2006 at 3:27 pm

    Well, if they do, he’s sure not looking any sexier…

  8. August 30, 2006 at 4:07 pm

    It’s going to be hard for us women to think clearly if we’re expected to starve ourselves . . . maybe that’s the conspiracy!!! If she’s that hungry from attempting to conform to impossible media standards, then puppet string will be that much easier to pull! Ha! Those tricky network execs . . .

  9. Jack Ketch
    August 30, 2006 at 4:19 pm

    They looked into that terrifying, shark-like visage and decided that her weight needed alteration?

  10. Caja
    August 30, 2006 at 5:48 pm

    This is starting to make me think of “Harrison Bergeron,” only slightly less creepy.

  11. August 30, 2006 at 8:47 pm

    What’s the point of doctoring that photo, anyway? Everyone will be too distracted by her “Man Who Laughs” rictus to notice the pounds they scraped off.

  12. zuzu
    August 30, 2006 at 8:59 pm

    You know, she does look a lot like Fire Marshal Bill in that doctored photo.

  13. Maureen
    August 31, 2006 at 1:32 pm

    What really disturbs me about the photos, both original and doctored, is the way that they have posed her face such that she is doing the “diminutive woman” head tip rather than looking us straight in the eyes the way photos typically portray “strong, authoritative” men.

  14. firefalluk
    September 1, 2006 at 8:11 am

    Christ. DO they alter pictures of Chris Matthews?

    Only to tipex out the horns, tail, and fangs. And possibly the other ass (the one he talks out of, I guess)

Comments are closed.