Internet declines latest Paris Hilton Sex tape

Bosco Robinson

The worldwide, publicly accessible series of pornography transmitting computer networks, commonly referred to as “The Internet”, has passed on Paris Hilton’s latest obscene home-video, The Spanner has learned.

A reliable source informed our journalists that Hilton made the Internet an exclusive offer of her latest gravity-defying cock-romp, in an attempt to recapture public notoriety ahead of the release of her new line of stress balls shaped after her grope-worn breasts.

However upon viewing the grainy footage, the unimpressed Internet decided it was not worthy of publication. In a memo leaked to our office, the Internet told the heiress’ PR company: “Paris Hilton, some anonymous boner-wielding jock, hotel room, yeah I think we’ve seen enough of that to be perfectly honest. Thanks but no thanks.”

This marks the first ever instance of the Internet employing filtration on pornographic material. Since it first began transmitting data in the early 70s, the Internet has gladly embraced, hosted and celebrated whatever raw unfiltered filth people were willing to broadcast. From Ali Babba’s Polar Bear Pussy Palace right through to the infamous “2 girls, 1 cup”, the Internet can undoubtedly credit the entirety of its success to lonely, bored, smut-obsessed men (and the occasional woman), browsing it’s archives for novel stimuli to fuel their tissue time.

But the decision to turn down Hilton’s sex tape is may have been pre-empted by the Internet’s introduction of quality control with its small offerings of non-pornographic content. Little-known non-pornographic site YouTube has been asking its users to stop and think before uploading videos of their cats doing something utterly pointless with a teaspoon, or cringe worthy cover performances of counting crows song.

We put it to Ron Purvman, Chief Executive of Wristjerk Internet Solutions: is it simply the case that people have become desensitised to pornographic material through over-exposure via the internet?

“I wouldn’t say that’s the case at all”, he told us, “more people vote in Nymphtastic.com’s ‘Boner of the Week’ poll, than voted in the last US Presidential election. Smut is as popular as it will ever be, but I think shakey footage of Hilton’s weathered snatch is just not the appealing sight it would have been a few years ago. Who knows, this could be the start of a qualitative revolution for Internet smut. Britney, for example, will certainly need to hit the gym and lay off the Taco Bell if she expects her next tape to get online.”

As much as it could spell our demise, The Spanner welcomes the introduction of selective pornographic Internet exposure. The positively pubescent excitement and pandemonium once provoked by an innocent nipple slip now creates little more than a ripple in the puddle of wasted DNA created by a plethora of nude beach slips, which have begun to slip into the broadsheets alongside fiscal progress reports. Could the easily accessible and imagination-draining footage of celebrities and socialites being pummelled by focus-group moulded girth be to blame? Is society any better for its familiarity with the dimensions of Paris Hilton's vagina over, say, Di Vinci's last supper? Are attention-starved peripherebrities soon to be introducing plots, scripts and creative dialogue to their gonzo sexploits, rivalling Hollywood’s finest films? After a moment of reflection, we here at the spanner think this is unlikely, as it is nearly impossible to add more depth, figurative or otherwise, to Paris Hilton’s collapsed excuse for a fanny.

Meanwhile, Hilton is yet to comment publicly on the tape’s rejection, though our source did suggest she will be looking into alternative methods to regain public attention:

“The rejection of the tape probably rules out the usual plan-b of getting out of limo with no panties on, but for a woman of Paris’ talents getting on the cover of waiting-room magazines the world over will not pose a problem. She could get arrested again, or maybe blurb out an opinion on a matter she clearly doesn’t need to understand, or maybe even attack a cameraman.”

Back to The Spanner Online!> > >