Isn't it time we stopped slavering over an actress's bum?
Do you recognise this picture? Perhaps not, but you'll almost certainly have seen it today.
You probably wouldn't have been looking at Gwyneth Paltrow's face, however.
Ms Paltrow was out on the red carpet last night for the premiere of the latest Iron Man film and while her smile might have been demure, her attire was not.
The black and white dress by Antonio Berardi caused the biggest press sensation since...well, since the last revealing gown worn by an actress with no knickers on.
It made the front pages of the Star and the Telegraph - something of an achievement - the Mail and the Express. None of them pretended that the picture was anything other than a piece of eye candy and all made lame jokes about raising eyebrows and being daring. How they all managed to miss/avoid Gwyn and bare it I shall never know.
SubScribe readily acknowledges that pictures of pretty women sell papers. But there should be a (sorry) figleaf of news to justify their appearance. Haven't we progressed at all in the years since Elizabeth Hurley burst out of That Dress and onto the front pages accompanied by the foppish actor-cum-kerb-crawler-com-scourge-of-the-press Hugh Grant?
The Guardian also put a token woman at the top of its front, albeit rather more modestly clad: a sunbather suggesting that better weather had arrived. And it managed to get Gwynnie, Katie Price and Justin Bieber above the masthead. It also had Foals, Iggy Pop, Paltrow again and a monkey in its puff. Very cerebral for a paper whose splash concerned the future of the press.
Only the Independent and the Times of the serious crew went for hard news. The Indie filled the top half of its front with the Bangladesh sweatshop disaster, while the Times had the ace front of the day with its harrowing and important exclusive about the use of chemical weapons in Syria.
This was a spectacular piece of serious reportage and the absolute winner of the day.
No Gwynnie for the Thunderer then? Ah, but wait. Take a look inside and there is a story telling us that tall, slim women have more babies. The piece is illustrated by a full-length photograph of a tall, slender actress in an Antonio Berardi creation.
Gwyneth Paltrow, we are informed in the caption, has two children.
Not four, not six, not more than the average. Two.
Come on! Talk about a lame excuse to run a picture of a comely woman showing her bum.