Kelly Brook: Loaded or full of it?

Every now and then I read about this or that Apple ad being pulled from circulation in Britain on account of the “truth in advertising” laws in that country being stricter than they are here in the States. Apparently, however, such laws don’t apply to men’s magazines.

“KELLY BROOK EXCLUSIVE! 100% UNSEEN PICTURES! HER ONLY SHOOT THIS YEAR, ONLY IN LOADED!” scream the headlines on the cover of next month’s Loaded. And lest anyone ponder the haunting familiarity of the cover photo for a moment as they turn to the article itself, one is immediately bludgeoned with “OMFG IT’S KELLY BROOK!”

But it doesn’t take long to recover and recognize most every photo presented; after a quick jaunt through my own gallery here, I found two of the seven pictures to have first been published in 2007, and three of them in 2006. There were two that I didn’t see in my search, but one of these two came from a Maxim photo shoot first published in 2001!

2007		2007

2006

2006		2006

Didn’t see this one in my gallery...		...or this one...

...but this one from the same shoot was published 2001

So what does this mean?

First, and most obviously, it means that Kelly needs to get back in front of the photographer’s lens so magazines like Loaded aren’t tempted to rehash ancient but far from forgotten photos of her. Making straight-to-DVD movies like Piranha is all well and good, but it’s the Cosmo for men mags that keep the public’s interest in her alive.

Second, it means that there’s a very easy work-around for Apple’s misleading British ads.

Think different.