I admit it. I looked. Not at the whole video, just a couple of screen caps. I felt bad about it, though. Sort of.
I looked. It was linked somewhere and I clicked on it. I had no idea who she even was.
I must be out of the loop and don’t know what you are referring to. I don’t dare google it at work…what is it?
Somebody took a video of Erin Andrews through the peephole of her hotel room. She is nude in the video. It was obviously an illegal act, but once it’s on the internet it’s on the internet. I think a lot of sites have been forced to take it down, but, as we know, you can always find it if you really want to.
I think they’re still trying to figure out who took the video.
My question was about whether people have or would be willing to look at the pics, even though they were taken illegally and without her knowledge. The flip side of that is that she IS really hot.
ETA for those who don’t know who Erin Andrews is, she’s a very attractive ESPN sportscaster.
Who’s Erin Andrews? he asked, not caring enough to google it.
See my edit above. A google image search on her name will yield rewarding, and mostly sfw results.
Everyone should be aware that the video is also being used as a malware-distribution lure. At least some of the sites hosting the video prompt you to install a “codec” to view the video. The “codec”, naturally, is malware.
How do you take a video through a peephole? Don’t they look out but not in? (Isn’t that the point of a peephole?) Or did someone go to the trouble of drilling it out or something?
No, I wouldn’t look. It is one thing to laugh at a celebrity caught in public flashing a boob or something, but in her private hotel room without her knowledge…how embarassing for her. That would be an awful thing to know someone did that to you and have the pictures floating around out there.
I would look (I couldn’t find it.)
Apparently, this video had been floating around for months, but nobody really noticed it until ESPN sent a cease & desist letter to some website that was showing it.
I feel terrible for her.
There are actually cameras called reverse peephole cameras that enable you to look through from the opposite side and show you a clear image. I don’t know if this is what was used on her, but it is certainly possible.
I haven’t made any effort to see it, but have seen a second or two here and there, just because so many TV “news” shows are broadcasting the clip.
I understand why many men will want to see it. Hey, I’m as shallow as the next guy. I just wish the TV hosts showing it would ADMIT that they’re just trying to appeal to prurient interest. What I can’t stand is, say, Bill O’Reilly or the New York Post showing clips of Erin Andrews nude, and then PRETENDING to be morally outraged by the whole thing.
wow. That is something I did not need to know.
I always thought voyeurism was interesting from a moral perspective. I’m about as open minded as possible when it comes to other people’s sexuality. Children and animals are not at all ok because it’s inherently impossible for there to be mutual consent, but there are many other equally disgusting acts with which I have no problem as long as everyone involved is into it and hopefully I don’t have to hear about the details.
Then you have this voyeuristic peeping Tom behavior which, on the one hand, literally every teenage boy in the universe engaged in to the best of his ability at least a few times and hardly shocks the conscience on a visceral level when compared to some of the weird shit people like. But on the other hand it’s a huge invasion of privacy and would be very damaging for anyone. For me, I feel better about people watching violent or degrading or disgusting yet consensual and informed porn than watching a camera hidden in a Macy’s changing room or some video of a sorority girl some ass posted online.
I’ve seen it. I found it on some site and took a look just to see what all the noise was about, not even knowing who she was. It’s honestly difficult to tell that it’s her. The video is pretty poor quality, and if there wasn’t a famous person in it no one would care.
I heard about it on the news. I won’t view the video but I’d like to see a cartoon recreation in stick figure form to know the technical side of it. Was it done using the fire detector?
I’d watch it. I haven’t and I wouldn’t try and seek it out but if it was on a page I was viewing I would watch.
I’m interested mostly in (1) how you take a video through a peephole and (2) how was it that she was naked in front of a peephole?
I have not. Would I? Only if it were terribly convenient.
There is some speculation I have seen that she was aware of it when it was being taken.
Specifically, because she does this odd “shoving my butt out” thing while she’s curling or brushing her hair. I’ve seen it, and it just looks… odd.
She is pretty hot though.