Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 7:59 AM ET, 10/12/2010

Kim Kardashian bares all for W magazine

By Liz Kelly

(Image courtesy W magazine)

Kim Kardashian regrets posing nude for Playboy in 2007. So it makes perfect sense that the reality show regular appears on the cover of this month's W magazine wearing exactly nothing. Well, except for some strategically placed text banners and her considerable talent.

The issue hits newsstands Wednesday, but four preview shots (including the one at right) are already available online.

Sources: W Magazine, Popeater

By Liz Kelly  | October 12, 2010; 7:59 AM ET
Categories:  Celebrities  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Minka Kelly named Esquire's 'sexiest woman alive'
Next: David Schwimmer secretly married; animated 'Napoleon Dynamite' coming to Fox

Comments

I had hitherto been blissfully ignorant of the size of that Kardashian booty. I'm just adding it to the list of things I can't unsee. Remind me to never, ever, GoogleImage Brett Favre.

Posted by: yellojkt | October 12, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

Is it me, or does she really not look like herself?

Posted by: crissyfresh | October 12, 2010 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Have we ever seen a magazine cover in this century that hasn't been photoshopped? Usually its a better job, but maybe they did the best they could, considering what they had to work with. Also the chat will now probably get some hits from guys goggling "nekkid" and "Kardashian." (No accounting for the taste of 14 year old boys)

Posted by: reddragon1 | October 12, 2010 10:19 AM | Report abuse

Ho hum, so to speak.

Posted by: Nosy_Parker | October 12, 2010 10:40 AM | Report abuse

Talk about overexposure. Nude in Playboy (regretably, wink, wink); semi-nude on her show; nude on video. Now W sees fit to put her on its cover in the nude. Boo W - expect better from the mag that's supposed to be the "fashion bible." What a waste of time.

Posted by: shelley514 | October 12, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

Talk about overexposure. Nude in Playboy (regretably, wink, wink); semi-nude on her show; nude on video. Now W sees fit to put her on its cover in the nude. Boo W - expect better from the mag that's supposed to be the "fashion bible." What a waste of time.

Posted by: shelley514 | October 12, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

I have one question about Kardashian: Why?

Posted by: djphilbin | October 12, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Djphilbin asks why. Answer: when you're only selling one thing, you need to market it heavily before it hits its sell-by date. Kim K's is rapidly approaching.

Posted by: northgs | October 12, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Overexposed and underdressed as usual. The sex tape appears to be the pinnacle of her "career".

Posted by: Desertdiva1 | October 12, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

We've already seen literally everything of Kartrashian, so why bother with the strategically placed headlines over her not-at-all-private parts? Bolting the barn door after the horse has fled?

And why am I SO not surprised to hear the mom was in favor of this photo spread. That woman is just gross. Raising your girls to be overly entitled skanks who think they have nothing to offer but their looks = not good parenting.

Posted by: Californian11 | October 12, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company