[LSVIXEN] Rumour Has It: Hank Preston is on a Moral Crusade!

[Al-Malikah]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The hottest tea, the spiciest gossip, the fiercest commentary

and no fucking censorship. We are the Los Santos VIXEN.
Hope you've been doing your kegels, babe.

 

Letter from the editor: Sis, stop reading the story and BE the story.

Submit your gossip to our handy and under-fucking-utilized gossip submission form. Chop chop. 

Also Like, Subscribe, Share, is this your first time online?  Click HERE ! LSVIXEN XOXO ❤️  

 

 

 

Rumour Has It: Hank Preston is on a Moral Crusade! 

 

(A living saint.)

 

Rumour has it THAT Hank Preston had the latest edition of Diversify censored because he's allegedly afraid of the corrupting effect of artistic nudes (that don't even show hole, wild). The LS Vixen thought it would be wise to gain insight from this paragon of morality and wisdom. So what we did was checked who Hank is actively following on Facebrowser so we can could show you some quotes from a little Face-Browser based interview alongside some of the profiles he's made the choice to follow the content from. Maybe if we look for the sort of sanitary, kind, and moral content that he watches online, we can understand his intent in moving heaven and earth to censor an article on a fucking homeless shelter. 

Let's dig in!

Hank gives us insight into how we ought to resist temptation, flanked by the titties and girl on girl action he must see when he logs into Face Browser.

 

 

 

But he's not just seeing chaste boudoir photography on his feed, he also seems supportive enough to follow these small businesses.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wow, he's really... diverse in who he follows and whose content he has access to online.

But, Vixen, he must be concerned about others more than himself!

 

You are absolutely right, me. Turns out while Hank Preston was very intent on removing an innocent and quality interview with a local doctor under the cities employ because there were tasteful images of models not even showing nips, cock, or genitalia. So surely, he's leading by example right?

Right? He'd never have his image associated with anything that might have a corrupting effect on the youth, RIGHT?

 

 

(Jesus fucking Christ, Hank.)

 

 

ALL IN ALL

 

Now obviously I'd never assume Hank approved of this bookshop using his likeness to shill copies of Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf, but maybe if he was less focused on both censoring a private media company, controlling other peoples images and content consumption he would be able to be more focused on... ASKING THE BOOKSHOP TO NOT USE HIS NAME AND IMAGE TO SHILL NAZI BOOKS.

 

In short. Fuck censorship. 

XOXO, 

DISCLAIMER

Spoiler

LS Vixen's (bitch ass) Disclaimer
 

The LS Vixen is a satire, parody, commentary, critique, news reporting and scholarly web publication, which may or may not use actual names often in quasi-real and/or fictitious narration. Any resemblance to the truth is purely coincidental, except for all references to politicians, celebrities and/or other personalities that are critiqued and/or commented upon, in which case they are based on real people, but still based almost entirely in fiction. All images were publicly accessible and fair use.

>Comments are enabled! 

Quote

Username:
Comment:

 

 

Edited February 7 by Al-Malikah
dead link fix

[NexusExodus]

Username: Hank Preston
Comment: You initiated a sincere interview regarding my love life, thoughts on youth, etc and maintained a polite demeanor. I responded with honest answers, yet you are distorting the narrative and spreading baseless slander. It is outrageous for you to suggest my involvement in drugs or inappropriate behavior despite my marital status

As for the Diversify incident, the owners and organizers behind Diversify failed to inform the City or Dr. Sade Aliz (who interviewed on behalf of the CIty) of any nude or inappropriate content that was going to be featured, and the City maintains a strict decorum for press appearances and professional statements. Nothing was censored, but voluntarily withdrawn by both parties, so not only are you wrong, but are entirely fabricating your own narrative. Secondly, I've already been in search of a lawyer to send a cease and desist to the owners of this online bookstore after being informed of it using my likeness the other night. 
 

Any future interview invitations from you will be declined as it's obvious you only seek sensationalist stories. You're hypocritical criticizing LSI for ethical journalism while lacking it yourself. Do your research and stop being a drama hag.

EDIT: The original interview has been posted separately after a discussion between myself, Sade, and those behind Diversify to clear up any accusations of censorship. A cease notice has also been issued to the online book retailer.

 

Edited January 15 by NexusExodus

[Mór-Ríoghain]

Username: Anonymous
Comment: hahahaha i cant blame him im tryin 2 sip that mud as well n that bamolition is fire 🔥🔥🔥🔥

[Sammy]

27 minutes ago, NexusExodus said:

Username: Hank Preston
Comment: You initiated a sincere interview request and maintained a polite demeanor. I responded with honest answers, yet you are distorting the narrative and spreading baseless slander. It is outrageous for you to suggest my involvement in drugs or inappropriate behavior despite my marital status

As for the Diversify incident, the owners and organizers behind Diversify failed to inform the City or Dr. Sade Aliz (who interviewed on behalf of the CIty) of any nude or inappropriate content that was going to be featured, and the City maintains a strict decorum for press appearances and professional statements. Nothing was censored, but voluntarily withdrawn by both parties, so not only are you wrong, but entirely fabricating your own narrative. Secondly, I've already been in search of a lawyer to send a cease and desist to the owners of this online bookstore after being informed of it using my likeness the other night. 
 

I will decline any future interview invitations from you as it's obvious you only see sensationalist stories. Your hypocrisy is evident as you criticize LSI for ethical journalism while lacking it yourself. Do your research and stop being a drama hag.

 

Username: FaithLabelle
Comment: 

We mutually decided to remove the content due to Sade's professional commitments. I want to clarify that the content in question featured artistic nudity, although I understand that it may be controversial and/or inappropriate in the eyes of some. I want to emphasize that I do not support any mockery directed toward Hank or any similar actions. Upon reading your comment on the article, I felt the need to clarify that I had informed Sade about the theme of the magazine edition. However, there might have been a miscommunication, as our discussions cover a wide range of topics when we are together. Nevertheless, I provide a basic overview of all models participating in my magazine editions. Sade's participation held particular significance for me because I truly enjoyed delving into her story. She is a very lovely woman.
 

When individuals sign the Independent Contractor Contract and NDA and model for us, it is not our responsibility to inform their employers. It falls under their duty, and Sade informed you about her involvement but not the specific theme. I want to stress that this particular theme was a one-time occurrence, and we handled it tastefully. While some may still find it controversial when compared to content on platforms like Facebrowser with explicit intent, can it genuinely be considered pornographic? I respect your perspective, and in consideration of you, Sade, and those who were offended by Sade's involvement (despite her being fully clothed in the interview segment), I have taken down the article.

Edited January 5 by Sammy

[BullChan]

*Username* Anonymous 
Comment: I mean, wasn't another doctor was blamed for the EXACT same thing before? It looks to me like they are doing the same but this time targeting another doctor. Soon they'll ask us not to talk about periods and after that what? They'll ban biology lessons in schools? What a joke. 

[NexusExodus]

On 1/4/2024 at 7:53 PM, Sammy said:

Username: FaithLabelle
Comment: 

We mutually decided to remove the content due to Sade's professional commitments. I want to clarify that the content in question featured artistic nudity, although I understand that it may be controversial and/or inappropriate in the eyes of some. I want to emphasize that I do not support any mockery directed toward Hank or any similar actions. Upon reading your comment on the article, I felt the need to clarify that I had informed Sade about the theme of the magazine edition. However, there might have been a miscommunication, as our discussions cover a wide range of topics when we are together. Nevertheless, I provide a basic overview of all models participating in my magazine editions.
 

When individuals sign the Independent Contractor Contract and NDA and model for us, it is not our responsibility to inform their employers. It falls under their duty, and Sade informed you about her involvement but not the specific theme. I want to stress that this particular theme was a one-time occurrence, and we handled it tastefully. While some may still find it controversial when compared to content on platforms like Facebrowser with explicit intent, can it genuinely be considered pornographic? I respect your perspective, and in consideration of you, Sade, and those who were offended by Sade's involvement (despite her being fully clothed in the interview segment), I have taken down the article.

Username: Hank Preston

Comment: Dr.Aliz and I hold no fault against you Faith, it was simply miscommunication.

Edited January 15 by NexusExodus

[Engelbert]

Username: Trollkvinne
Comment: Hollon hollon hollon. I am getting confused here. The doctor was naked or the models? If the doctor...then why? If the models, then who cares?

You have dozens of magazines, that feature, both. Nudity and general content. Of course if it was mutual decision, then by all means. Should be respected.

Just don't try to pull the censorship card, no law states, that you can't have fully naked model next to someone's interview. It's on the interviewed person to consider their appearance in said media.

 

*

Spoiler

Trace is still in Los Santos, but leads to an arcade in Downtown Vinewood. Profile appears to be plain and created recently

*

Edited January 5 by Engelbert

[Jax]

Username: Dice
Comment: Damn, I always knew Hank was a real one, dude said nothing but facts, as soon as that porn side died off, FB became a softcore website with bitches thinking their opinions matter cuz they get 40+ likes per photo 😂😂😂

[Sammy]

5 minutes ago, Engelbert said:

Username: Trollkvinne
Comment: Hollon hollon hollon. I am getting confused here. The doctor was naked or the models? If the doctor...then why? If the models, then who cares?

You have dozens of magazines, that feature, both. Nudity and general content. Of course if it was mutual decision, then by all means. Should be respected.

Just don't try to pull the censorship card, no law states, that you can't have fully naked model next to someone's interview. It's on the interviewed person to consider their appearance in said media.

 

*

  Hide contents

Trace is still in Los Santos, but leads to an arcade in Downtown Vinewood. Profile appears to be plain and created recently

*

Username: Faith Labelle
Comment: During our interview segments, we grant our interviewees the freedom to choose their attire based on their personal preferences, and/or we dress them accordingly to their brand image. We've conducted interviews with a diverse range of individuals, including celebrities and senators. Recognizing that they may have prior commitments, we permit them to dress without adhering strictly to a predefined theme. As an example, Sade opted for a suit during her interview segment.

Edited January 5 by Sammy

[Engelbert]

4 minutes ago, Sammy said:

Username: Faith Labelle
Comment: During our interview segments, we grant our interviewees the freedom to choose their attire based on their personal preferences, and/or we dress them accordingly to their brand image. We've conducted interviews with a diverse range of individuals, including celebrities and senators. Recognizing that they may have prior commitments, we permit them to dress without adhering strictly to a predefined theme. As an example, Sade opted for a suit during her interview segment.

Username: Trollkvinne
Comment: Ahh I see. Well it depends on taste. I mean people CAN dress however they want. But they SHOULD consider whether it is appropriate according to their political or societal status quo. Which is where your stylists should have a hand imo.

Edited January 5 by Engelbert