VH1 has a reality show called “Dating Naked”.
Contestants go on dates with strangers . . . while naked.
It’s VH1, so of course all the naked body parts that “count” as nudity are blurred in post-production before the episode is aired. However, a former contestant who’s episode aired on July 31st is now suing VH1 alleging that they failed to blur an exposure of her anus and vagina which appear when she is wrestling her date on the beach.
Did VH1 really broadcast her unblurred anus and vagina?
All the articles I have been able to find focus only on making fun of this woman and implying that she is being disingenuous in her shock that she is shown naked on a show called “Dating Naked”. All the article repeat her allegation, but nothing that I’ve found either confirms or refutes her claim that the broadcast footage allows and unobstructed view of her anus and vagina.
Sure, I get why it’s a fun story to report on.
Yes, I agree that the woman comes off as completely disingenuous.
But, did it happen???
I just have a hard time believing that VH1 would air uncensored footage of a naked anus and vagina even with the consent of the person being shown.
I was able to find one image- in a Bing image search with safe search turned off- that does seem to show her anus and vagina. Now, that image had to come from somewhere, but that doesn’t necessarily prove that it is how the image was broadcast by VH1. Also, the site that shows the image is peddling porn. Surely they anticipated that people would be doing searches for this image. They easily could have gotten a screen capture of the original broadcast and then replaced the blurred spot with a realistic image of a woman’s undercarriage. Or they could just have her name and “Dating Naked” attached to a completely different image of a naked man and woman wrestling on a beach. I’m only speculating because it is the one single site that I’ve been able to find that carries the image. Article #1 with no helpful information (Pedestrian.TV) Article #2 with no helpful information (HuffPo) Article #3 with no helpful information (People)
Here’s the uncensored image I found. It’s at a porn site called Purpz.
I think they likely did air it. Where would that site have gotten the still otherwise? Plus, if the hadn’t aired it, I would imagine Viacom would have denied it.
That’s my thought as well. Of course, it wouldn’t surprise me if the major porn sites (or maybe the skeevier ones) as well as places like TMZ and the like are probably tripping over themselves to get to anyone who works on the set or with the uneddited footage to get shots like this. On the one hand, if that shot was broadcast, just like that, it can easily be verified because people will still have it on their DVRs. If not, it was probably leaked. If the shot can be matched up to something actually filmed, then it would be someone that had access to the raw footage, otherwise, it could just be a cell phone picture.
FTR, this is the first I’ve heard of it, so I have no idea what the story is.
I hope this goes to court, just so the judge can order the bailiff to slap some sense into her. “Oh my God, I got a Quarter-Pounder at McDonald’s and there was MEAT in it!”
What a stupid idea for a show, is my first reaction.
Then again, we live in a time where Hannah Montana grew up to be the tiniest fraction removed from a softcore porn star, so… I dunno. Personally, I think the whole nudity taboo is dumb.
I’m surprised Viacom specified in their release forms that they’d never release uncensored footage. Even if they can’t air it on basic cable there’s always a DVD release.
I am sure VH1 is just beside themselves from all the publicity. How horrible everyone is now talking about a show that 90% didn’t know existed and the other 10% thought was a Family Guy parody. Such a terrible “accident”.
Yeah, except she says the release forms all insisted everything would always be blurred. So this is like getting meat in your garden salad and being told “eh, it’s McD’s, they fuck up sometimes.”
So, wait… Someone is willing to wrestle naked in front of a camera, after signing a model release…and is peeved that images were shown somewhere?
Whatever happened to the idea of not doing things in front of cameras that you wouldn’t want the world to see?
(It’s like “revenge porn.” No way in hell I’d ever let even my dearest lover take pics of me butt nakers. Betrayal of trust is just too common in humanity.)
What about the taint? Did they blur the taint?
I too am curious about the psychology of someone who has no trouble going on a naked date with a stranger, and having it broadcast on TV, but is horrified that said broadcast included a moment of her unblurred
I think it’s at least ten steps beyond that. Letting a lover take pictures of you naked gives you at least a reasonable expectation that the pictures will remain private. But signing a contract in which you agree to go naked on camera in the full knowledge that they’re going to broadcast the footage on basic cable? And then complaining they invaded your privacy? That’s ridiculous to pretend you have any sense of privacy regarding nudity left at that point.
And I’m guessing VH1’s lawyers are not incompetent. I’d be amazed if there isn’t language in the contract that allows VH1 to use any footage it wants in any manner it wants edited in any way it wants.
Nizewitz is just the latest in a long line of people who wanted to be on a reality show and then was unhappy with the way the show used her.
Who was the poor guy without internet access freeze framing VH1 for a shot of a anus and vagina? I’m guessing this is how it got out, poor porn deprived dude we salute you!