"Yep, just found it.

Issue 14, "Apology To Isla Blair" because "we ran materials that were inappropriate, not in keeping with the feel of the magazine and hurtful to Ms. Blair and her family." So are you now saying that but for Jimmy Zero and the printer, the "feel" would have been different? And are you also saying that your apology to Isla Blair was actually bogus because you would like to have run more such "adult" material?

Same page, apology to Carlson for "and pain and problems" caused for printing not only a nude but a fake. Was Carlson feeling pain solely because the photo didn't show her real body"
*******************************************************************

I'm a bit baffled  by whatever point you are trying to make, "Johnny"
-re: Isla Blair - that article showing her topless in a British television show came from a British newspaper of the time. After we published it, we were contacted by Isla who said the photos were never to have been published in that newspaper,  and she was embarrassed by them. Since she had been kind enough to grant us a very far reaching interview for the TASTE THE BLOOD OF DRACULA articles in LSoH #13. So I apologized to her for running it.
-re: Veronica Carlson. That topless shot of her appeared in a British magazine of the 60s (all of Jimmy Zero's photos were from magazines in the UK, not screen grabs or some such). It identified it as "Veronica Carlson. " Veronica says she never posed for that shot. It don't know the exact truth so published another apology.

Apologizing for individual choices, from time to time, doesn't prevent an editor or publisher from running "adult" materials. My thoughts have always  been, don't like an article - don't read it. Don't want to look at photos of undressed women - don't look at them. Not tough to do. I would have run the continuing series of Jimmy Zero articles, but it didn't happen.