![hustler magazine covers for 1979 hustler magazine covers for 1979](https://d2j6dbq0eux0bg.cloudfront.net/images/17393189/1523496890.jpg)
Respondent stated in his complaint that publication of the ad parody in Hustler entitled *49 him to recover damages for libel, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. In small print at the bottom of the page, the ad contains the disclaimer, “ad parody - not to be taken seriously.” The magazine’s table of contents also lists the ad as “Fiction Ad and Personality Parody.”Soon after the November issue of Hustler became available to the public, respondent brought this diversity action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia against Hustler Magazine, Inc., Larry C. The Hustler parody portrays respondent and his mother as drunk and immoral, and suggests that respondent is a hypocrite who preaches only when he is drunk. We now consider whether this award is consistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.The inside front cover of the November 1983 issue of Hustler Magazine featured a “parody” of an advertisement for Campari Liqueur that contained the name and picture of respondent and was entitled “Jerry Falwell talks about his first time.” This parody was modeled after actual Campari ads that included interviews with various celebrities about their “first times.” Although it was apparent by the end of each interview that this meant the first time they sampled Campari, the ads clearly played on the sexual double entendre of the general subject of “first times.” Copying the form and layout of these Campari ads, Hustler’s editors chose respondent as the featured celebrity and drafted an alleged “interview” with him in which he states that his “first time” was during a drunken incestuous rendezvous with his mother in an outhouse. The jury found for petitioners on the defamation claim, but found for respondent on the claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress and awarded damages. The District Court directed a verdict against respondent on the privacy claim, and submitted the other two claims to a jury. Respondent Jerry Falwell, a nationally known minister who has been active as a commentator on politics and public affairs, sued petitioner and its publisher, petitioner Larry Flynt, to recover damages for invasion of *48 privacy, libel, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
![hustler magazine covers for 1979 hustler magazine covers for 1979](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ef/d1/cd/efd1cd2ae4f44f284e4c281462f81a03.jpg)
![hustler magazine covers for 1979 hustler magazine covers for 1979](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_PVefWH3OKs/W42U2FteOHI/AAAAAAAAATo/kk-52-GP3u43dl8J7L_138NzSSRVzITQACLcBGAs/s1600/2015_Anniversary_Issue.jpg)
CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST delivered the opinion of the Court.Petitioner Hustler Magazine, Inc., is a magazine of nationwide circulation.
![hustler magazine covers for 1979 hustler magazine covers for 1979](https://wonderclub.com/images/HUST/HUST197912.jpg)
Norman Roy Grutman argued the cause for respondent. Isaacman argued the cause for petitioners. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT *47 Alan L. Centrefold Venus of the Month 47: Sandy Bernadou.Venus in Black Stockings 3: Prints by Manuel Robbe.Venus on the Cover: Playboy covers for 2013.Disappointing Anniversary Venus: Kate Moss.The short answer, however, is that it was those magazines that relied mostly on advertising revenue (Playboy) for their income that were being the most careful and those that made their money from cover sales (Hustler) that were pushing the envelope. A big conservative backlash was brewing in the US and some of the magazines couldn't afford to lose revenue by getting banned or sued especially as responsibility for what was deemed obscene had been passed down to the local rather than the Federal courts. Over the next few years Playboy, for example, would get less and less visually explicit only for the pendulum to swing back again in 19 and then swing back again before another push towards more explicit pictures in 2000-2001.
HUSTLER MAGAZINE COVERS FOR 1979 SERIES
You would have expected this sort of thing to have gone on a steady curve of more and more explicit pictures since the first pubic shots in the early seventies but, as this series is showing, this is far from the case. Someone in one of the comments on our last Pubic Wars post asked us why some of the magazines were retreating from their earlier explicitness. The Genesis girls were still showing their bits, as demonstrated here by Ingrid from their May issue.