Julia Louis-Dreyfus’ Naked ‘Rolling Stone’ Cover Has A Major Error, But Is It A Joke?
It was recently revealed that Julia Louis-Dreyfus is on the newest issue of Rolling Stone wearing nothing except the U.S. Constitution tattooed on her back. Everyone was all "Oooh! Sexy! Sexy!" totally unaware that there was something wrong with the photo all along. (By "all along," I mean the few hours since this thing was released. The news movies quickly, people!) Julia Louis-Dreyfus' Rolling Stone cover features an inaccurate Constitution. Blasphemy!
On the cover, you can clearly see John Hancock's signature at the bottom, but the problem is, John Hancock did not sign the Constitution. Hancock famously signed the Declaration of Independence with a large, stylized signature which is the reason we use "John Hancock" as a synonym for signature today. Hancock, though he played a part in the formation of the Constitution, did not actually sign the document.
According to the Daily News, this mistake was first spotted by Twitter users, but who knows, there could be people in this world who notice things and don't blab about them on Twitter immediately. (Shout out to everyone who noticed this and kept their mouths shut with silent pride!)
Not only was the temporary tattoo used on the cover of the magazine, there is also a photo of Louis-Dreyfus inside of the magazine which shows a John Hancock impersonator signing her with a tattoo needle.
This makes it seem that there's a possibility that Rolling Stone did this on purpose as a joke to go along with Louis-Dreyfus' role on Veep. Could they really have messed up on fact-checking so much that they got to the point of having a model dress like Hancock and tattoo Louis-Dreyfus naked body? Maybe, but if they did, they should totally go along with the joke excuse.
Regardless of what actually happened, Louis-Dreyfus already got her own joke in:
Image: Mark Seliger/Rolling Stone