What am I missing? Perpetually, there are less than flattering photos on the cover of rag magazines showing Hollywood bimbos in bikinis with more cellulite than blubber on a blue whale. No one can convince me those bimbos sign releases for the photographer or the publisher. Is that considered "editorial" purposes? Am I wrong, that releases are needed for promotion, or advertising purposes, but not if the photo is part of a book, magazine, or newspaper, and not part of promotion or advertising?

If a photo is included in a book, and the same photo is used on the cover of the book, does the use on the cover require a release, but the same photo in the book does not? If the answer to that question is "Yes", why are the rag magazine cover photos published without a release?

Help me understand. Please!