Introducing the nudist journalism bingo card

I've said it before and I'll say it again: journalism about nudism is, in general, terrible.

News sites know that nudity is compelling. It invites clicks, whether because people are generally interested in possibly getting a glimpse of skin, or because they're outraged and want to vent their disgust.

But for some reason, news sites often add a stupid, childish slant to the content as well. Puns about body parts are common (how often do you see the word "abreast" or "cheeky" in other news articles?) as well as wordplay about nudity with terms like "exposure" and "bare".

More problematic are the narratives that these articles play into. The general public tends to think nudity is inherently weird or silly; the extension of that idea is that nudists are weird, ridiculous people (and thus not deserving of journalistic objectivity or respect). And of course the association of nudity with sex means that nudists are secretly perverts and exhibitionists.

All nonsense, of course, but you'd be hard pressed to find an article about nudists that doesn't take at least some of these tired, cliched jokes and mistruths and stick them in. Sometimes it’s just an editor adding a stupid title, and sometimes the journalist peppers idiotic jokes throughout the piece.

And that’s why I created the Nudism Journalism Bingo Card - so that you can see just how enthusiastically an article on a nudist topic embraces these features!

Okay, we’re not seriously playing bingo here. But it is rare for an article about nudists not to check at least a few of these squares off.

As I’ve said before, journalism about nudism is terrible. Let’s keep up the pressure on newspapers and news sites to cover nudity fairly, ethically, and positively.

Share Your Thoughts

What squares did I miss on my bingo card? Are there any cliches that drive you especially crazy when journalists write about nudism? Tell me in the comments - I might even update my bingo card with your suggestions!