The Hannah Montana Photo Controversy

A controversy had erupted over the photo of the 15-year-old teen superstar Miley Cyrus (better known as Hannah Montana):

One photo shows Cyrus topless but clutching a sheet to her chest, her bare back exposed, looking toward the camera over one shoulder.

A caption alongside the photo reads: "Um, was Cyrus -- or Disney -- at all anxious about this shot?" It then quotes Cyrus as saying: "No, I mean I had a blanket on. And I thought, 'This looks pretty, and really natural.' I think it's really artsy."

The photos were taken by Annie Leibovitz, a renowned photographer known for her portraits of celebrities.

The magazine refers to the "topless but demure portrait" as Leibovitz's idea and quotes Cyrus as saying, "It wasn't in a skanky way ... And you can't say no to Annie. She's so cute. She gets this puppy dog look and you're like, 'O.K.'"

A Disney Channel spokesman, Patti McTeague, said in a statement on Sunday that the photos were meant to sell magazines.

"Unfortunately, as the article suggests, a situation was created to deliberately manipulate a 15-year-old in order to sell magazines," her statement said.

My respect for Annie Leibovitz, an accomplished photographer known for her portraits of celebrities, had just gone to zero. I've never had any respect for Vanity Fair. Ugh.

Link | DListed has the controversial pic (I think it was yanked off the Vanity Fair website) - Thanks Geekazoid!

Newest 5
Newest 5 Comments

I would glad to join you,I am a new member of your commodity so can u tell me all what is all about that commodity work for

Thanks & Regards

jack parker

Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Do any of you remember what you were like when you were fifteen? Were you naive ingots, or did you have the capacity to understand what you were doing?

Miley Cyrus knew that a picture of her bare back skin was being taken. Did she understand that the sentiment of the general American public has attention span of a boll weevil? Did she know that the paying citizens would not have the capacity to understand the artistic nature of the photographs of current controversy?

EVERYBODY CALM DOWN. The photographs of Ms. Cyrus aren't meant for sex appeal. They are beautiful, especially in the fact that they connect her in the human form, as opposed to the centrifugal "perfect being" ideal of modern popular culture icons in which we are so accustomed.

Miley Cyrus is a human being, child or not. Adding the label of "under eighteen" does not change the person of whom she identifies. Regardless of Miley Cyrus' identity, it is solely the responsibility of the parent to rear their own child. When the factor of childhood influence is removed, what does a person have against a beautiful photograph of a beautiful person?

Frame perspective, and you'll frame perception. Rework your conception of "child" into "person", and give equity to your "child's" capacity for reason, and you'll never have to worry that your own child's capacity for reason becomes adulterated. Every witch hunt starts with you and whom you accuse.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Oh lord, everyone needs to get off their high horses. You see less of her than you would in a bathing suit. She's fully covered and looks beautiful and natural. I think people are being quite hypocritical about this.

Disney most of all:
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Login to comment.

Email This Post to a Friend
"The Hannah Montana Photo Controversy"

Separate multiple emails with a comma. Limit 5.


Success! Your email has been sent!

close window

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
Learn More