Joining the recent trend of nude celebs (Kim Kardashian, Joy Bryant, Catherine Zeta Jones, Christina Aguilera, Claudia Schiffer...shall I go on?) Jada Pinkett-Smith bares all for the June cover of ESSENCE magazine. On the second cover, she wears a minidress and rocks glorious, voluminous curls.
While the gorgeous actress and mother of two can do no wrong in my eyes, I have to question why celebrities are baring it all with a renewed sense of vigor and frequency in these past couple of months. Is it to make a statement (Jada's statement is apparently for her daughter, pint-size fashionista Willow, to embrace her body)? Or to show something new on your (sixth) cover of the same magazine?
We explored the need for magazine covers to feature new subjects and I'm starting to think their answer is run the same celebrity, but naked this time to show readers something they haven't seen.
Is it working? Are we willing to buy the same star on the same mag if they're in the nude? I'm not completely sold...though Jada Pinkett-Smith's skin is flawlessly smooth (what beauty products does she use? I need that glow in my life).
What are your thoughts, Glamazons? Do you love the cover? Do you think it's a "statement" or a transparent sales tactic?
Kisses,
Coutura