Mike Wallace Interviews Playboy

For many months before "The Mike Wallace Interview" appeared on network TV, Wallace conducted his show for a strictly New York audience. It became, in that period, the most popular program in the city, with a reputation for rough – timing its interviewees that has been softened somewhat since going national. (On one of those early shows, Mary Margaret McBride, when pressed on why she has never married, confessed: "I have never found the right man, but I contemplated having a baby with an Italian I was in love with.") During that period, Playboy publisher Hugh M.Hefner appeared on the program. Before the interview, Mike remarked, "You have a good magazine, but I'm not going to say so on the air," and then explained that the previous guest had not been very "controversial," so he intended asking unusually pointed questions. Afterwards, in his syndicated TV column, John Crosby objected to what seemed to be unfair prejudice on Wallace's part and Wallace said it was one of the few times when his research had been inadequate, "forcing him to hammer away at a few points in hand which sounded unfair." Nevertheless, Wallace's "pointed" questions gave Hefner an opportunity to explain a good deal about Playboy and we thought readers might be interested in this edited version of the interview on the magazine's Fourth Anniversary.

----------------

[Q] Wallace: Good evening, I'm Mike Wallace.

[A] Tonight our guest is the 30-year-old brain behind the hottest property in the publishing world. He's Hugh Hefner, editor and publisher of Playboy Magazine. By occupation, he's an expert on American women. We'll ask Hugh what he thinks of the American girl -- and we'll try to find out why he really did start Playboy and whether or not it is just a smutty book.

A little under four years ago, a junior copywriter in Esquire Magazine's promotion department quit in a huff after he was refused a five dollar raise. And that refusal turned out to be one of the worst decisions ever made at Esquire, because the name of that copywriter was Hugh Hefner. He is now the editor and publisher of Playboy Magazine, which claims to have pushed Esquire right out of first place as the magazine for American men. Just how did Hugh Hefner start Playboy -- what kind of a magazine is it -- what kind of a man is Hugh Hefner? Stay tuned and we'll turn to the man himself.

Hugh -- Time Magazine, September 24, 1956, describes Playboy as "oversexed." We checked this month's issue and found twenty pictures of girls in various stages of undress. Now, sir, what is your conception of the editorial policy of your magazine, Playboy?

[A] Hefner: We're trying to make it the best magazine in America for the young urban man, Mike. And if it seems "oversexed,"I think it's because it is in rather sharp contrast to the so-called general interest or family-type publications. Most of the magazines usually included in this classification are pretty female oriented. We recognized when we began Playboy that our audience was going to be specialized -- literate, urban and adult male -- and we recognized that we couldn't produce a publication for this audience that would also be suited in all ways to Mom and the kiddies. It wouldn't be an honest job of editing if it were.

[Q] Wallace: Literate, urban and adult. Would you justify your use of the word literate? Let's take your current issue, which I have here in front of me. In what sense do you feel that it's a literate magazine?

[A] Hefner: With this issue and, I think, with all of them, we're aiming at an audi- (continued on page 82) Mike Wallace (continued from page 61) ence above average in taste and educational background.

[Q] Wallace: Above average in taste and educational background – these are very interesting sociological phrases, I guess, but – uh – what does that mean – above average in taste and educational background?

[A] Hefner: Over 70% of our readers are college educated, Mike. A majority of them are executives and professional men, with an annual income considerably above the national average. The point I'm making is, the audience is a very specialized one and we try to edit Playboy with these men in mind. They expect the best and that's what we try to give them. In the particular issue you have in front of you, you'll find an original story by John Collier, another by Ray Bradbury, with original art by Picasso. In the last couple of issues, we've had a review of the current Broadway season by Wolcott Gibbs, an article on American advertising by Philip Wylie, satire by P.G. Wodehouse; next month, we have a new novelette by Budd Schulberg. Whether it's fiction, articles, art, photography – we try to publish the very best that's available.

[Q] Wallace: You keep talking about all of the literature that's involved, but you don't seem to pay much mind to the fact that there's very little literature and a tremendous amount of sex here. It seems to me that the literature is liberally larded, fore and aft, with pictures of girls, as I said a little earlier, in various stages of undress and some of the frankest – not double entendre, but single entendre – jokes I've ever seen.

[A] Hefner: I think, as I've said, that it seems that way only because Playboy is in such sharp contrast to what we've learned to expect from the other major magazines in America today. Most Publications are produced with the same viewpoint as the typical TV show – aimed at an entire household – at every-one and no-one. I'm not suggesting there's anything wrong with this approach, but it certainly doesn't make much sense for a magazine intended for urban men. We try to edit Playboy with the adult directness of a good foreign film – the spice and fun of a Broadway musical. That was one of the big reasons for beginning the book – we felt there was no magazine doing a really successful job of entertaining the audience we're trying to reach.

[Q] Wallace: Yes, but let's not hide behind altruistic motives, if we can get away from them temporarily, Hugh. Chicago Magazine quoted you to the effect that sex will always be a primary ingredient of the magazine. Isn't that what you're really selling – kind of a high-class dirty

[A] Hefner: No, I don't think so at all. There's an important distinction here. Sex always will be an important part of the book, because sex is probably the single thing that men are most interested in. We're quite honest and open about it – we think that's a healthy way to be. But I would estimate that no more than 5% of any issue of playboy is concerned with sex, and we seem to be devoting an entire half-hour program to it here tonight. In the issue you have there before you, you will find many non-sex features in addition to the Playmate Review, which is a bringing together of all the Playmates of the past year, . . . we do that in each Holiday Issue...

[Q] Wallace: The Playmate Review? Hefner: Yes ... I assume those are the pictures you are referring to ...

Wallace: And you bring together all your Playmates.

[A] Hefner: Yes – pictorially.

[Q] Wallace: The subtitle on the cover of Playboy says: "Entertainment for Men." Now in the profile on you in Chicago Magazine, you said that your magazine appealed to the young sophisticated guy – intelligent, if not intellectual, who finds most of his entertainment indoors. Is that a definition of you or of the fellow who buys your magazine? A young, sophisticated guy, intelligent, if not intellectual, who finds most of his entertainment indoors?

[A] Hefner: An honest answer is probably, both, Mike. The magazine was conceived as an expression of what I thought a men's magazine should be and it very much reflects my own personality. It is the sort of magazine that I myself would enjoy, I think, if I were a reader rather than the editor.

[Q] Wallace: What's wrong with the muscular men's magazines?

[A] Hefner: Nothing at all. I think--

[Q] Wallace: What's wrong with outdoor sports? With hunting and fishing and he-man adventure?

[A] Hefner: Not a thing. But I felt there was a good-sized male audience that was a little more interested in urban living – in the nice things about an apartment, hi-fi – wine, women and song. And these are the things that Playboy concerns itself with.

[Q] Wallace: These fellows just never go outside?

[A] Hefner: Occasionally – on very balmy days.

(Laughter)

[Q] Wallace: Most of the big circulation magazines, as you pointed out, make a point of advertising that they are for every member of the family. Would you suggest that Playboy be left around the home of a young married couple with a child, let's say, in the age range from 10 to 16?

[A] Hefner: Playboy is edited for an adult male audience and you cannot expect such a publication to serve up an editorial content suited to the intellectual and emotional level of children. But in a direct answer to your question, I don't believe there is anything within the pages of the magazine that would be harmful to a normal, healthy American child.

[Q] Wallace: Pictures of--

[A] Hefner: Let me make this point, Mike. There's nothing dirty in sex unless we make it dirty. A picture of a beautiful woman is something that a fellow of any age ought to be able to enjoy. If he doesn't, then that's the kid to watch out for. Our Associate Publisher, A. C. Spectorsky, author of The Exurbanites, has observed that when he was young, there were two kinds of boys – those who liked to pull the wings off flies and those who liked girls. We confess to a preference for the latter. The deviates, the perverts, the serious juvenile delinquents – they're not interested in healthy boy-girl relationships. It is the sick mind that finds something loathe-some and obscene in sex. For us, sex is neither dirty nor is it a sacred cow. A society that is able to laugh at itself – sex included – has a pretty healthy attitude.

[Q] Wallace: Esquire Magazine started out on much the same premise. An editorial executive at Esquire said over the telephone yesterday that almost everything in Playboy is an imitation of Esquire. Certainly such features as the jokes, liquor, jazz, travel and center-fold girly-spread do parallel each other. You came out of the Esquire organization. What has Playboy got that Esquire hasn't, besides more girls?

[A] Hefner: I think that it far more accu-rately reflects the tempo and thinking of the times. We've had such a phenomenal success – with such an aware audience – that I don't think it is possible to explain Playboy's popularity by simply looking inside an issue. I believe we have a large segment of male urban America today – identifying with the book – feeling that this is a publication that has real meaning for them. They've adopted Playboy as their magazine – as a symbol, sort of, as much as the sports car, the dry martini and the gray flannel suit.

[Q] Wallace: Let's switch away from Playboy and to Hugh Hefner for a minute, if we may. Early in the show you were quoted as describing yourself, or perhaps the symbol of the fellow to whom you sell your magazine, as a young, city-bred male, sophisticated, intelligent if not intellectual, and so forth. Now, in self-appraisal, Hugh, are you indoor or outdoor, high-brow or lowbrow? Well, let's start there. Are you an indoor or outdoor fellow, by and large?

[A] Hefner: When we say "indoor," I think I should make this point – we don't mean that our reader never gets outside his apartment. We use the expressing city interests, urban interests. I'm very much an urban guy.

[Q] Wallace: High-brow, middle-brow or low-brow?

[A] Hefner: I consider myself upper-middle.

[Q] Wallace: How important is money to you?

[A] Hefner: A very secondary aim. Wallace: Truly? Hefner: Truly.

[Q] Wallace: I gather, from reading the Chicago Magazine portrait of you, that you rather like the affluence, the power, the celebrity that came with being the publisher of a successful magazine.

[A] Hefner: It's very, very nice . . . and quite unexpected . . .

[Q] Wallace: What's the kick that you get out of it? You're not after the money?

[A] Hefner: The primary purpose is a thing I felt I had to do. And the very real pleasure is in the doing. Most of the money that we're fortunate enough to be making from the magazine goes right back into it – to make the future issues still better.

[Q] Wallace: You mean you just like the business of writing and laying-out and working with a paste-pot and selling and so forth? Just the business itself?

[A] Hefner: I don't want to seem that limited. Actually – it's a yearning to communicate – to express one's talents and ideas. The creation of what we hope will prove to be the best men's magazine in America is, I think, enough of an aspiration for one guy in one lifetime.

[Q] Wallace: Tell me this, as an editor and a publisher and a man, what in your opinion, Hugh, makes a woman exciting?

[A] Hefner (laughing): That's a real beauty, Mike. Well . . . I think it's an indefinable thing . . . a combination of face and figure and personality . . . the way a girl projects herself. You're talking about a girl in person, I assume, in contrast to a photograph.

[Q] Wallace: Do you take out many of your Playmates? Are you attracted to the kind of girls who pose in the nude?

[A] Hefner: I've never thought about any big difference between girls who pose in the nude and girls who don't.

[Q] Wallace: Really?

[A] Hefner: Really. The majority of our Playmates are not professional models. They're attractive girls that we find all over America and they pose for a variety of reasons. Some because they think it will help them get into the movies . . . and some just for the fun of it. In the past year, one Playmate was an airline stewardess, one a New York telephone operator and one a Phi Beta Kappa writer.

[Q] Wallace: Hugh, let me ask you one last question to which I would like a "yes" or "no" answer. Do you respect a girl who would pose in the nude – or very close to it –

[A] Hefner: Certainly.

Wallace: – For a magazine that has a circulation of close to a million?

[A] Hefner: Certainly.

[Q] Wallace: Hugh Hefner – a hugely successful newcomer to the publishing world. His formula for success is elemental. And whether you condone or deplore his formula, Hugh Hefner has proved beyond any doubt that there is, indeed, nothing like a dame.