I've been trying to be the only person with access to a blog to not talk about those photos of Miley Cyrus by Annie Leibovitz. But when I saw Stephen Colbert's commentary about the story, I caved. It's hilarious! And...when was the last time anyone on television talked about photography with this kind of knowledge? (After a nice runthrough of Annie's career, he even mentions baby photographer Anne Geddes.) I'm a little shocked at the reaction these images have caused. Then again I'm not a tween girl, and my own daughter is too old for "Hannah Montana." But to me the pictures seem classy enough. I put the blame on all the media who irresponsibly said the images show Miley "topless," which they didn't. At least the New York Times apologized for doing that. Meanwhile, the New York Post merely said the images were "near nude," which is a Rupert Murdoch way of saying "not nude."
I heard this morning that the Cyrus family feels they were misled by Annie, while Vanity Fair says mom and pop Cyrus were shown computer-generated mock-ups of what the images would look like. (The Cyruses wouldn't lie just to protect all that Disney money would they?) Meanwhile, Perez Hilton noted that an old photo of Diana Ross by Annie looks suspiciously like her recent Miley picture. --David Schonauer