Great - thanks Mumsnet (and thanks Tabouleh for alerting me to this).
See my post on the feminism thread about the rubbish response I got from Shell last week about their display of The Sport at toddler eye level:
Link to thread about Shell
In my experience, WHSmith and Tesco do not give a monkey's. Smith's told me a couple of years ago that they adhere to their own voluntary guidelines of not displaying lads mags at a height below 1.2m so that children won't be exposed to them.
I went onto the Department of Health website and found an age/height survey and found that the average 6-7 year old is now over 1.2m tall. I sent this information to WHSmith and asked what they defined as a 'child' but they kept answering really vaguely and in the end refused to answer anything in writing and offered to speak to me on the phone instead (weird!). I offered to come and meet them in person as their office isn't far from where I live but they declined that offer too.
Tesco are also rubbish.
The Co-op at least tries to display them on the top shelves but I only know of one Co-op that covers them up.
And credit where it's due to Sainsbury's and Morrisons who listened to their customers and covered them up. I avoid Tesco and WHSmut now and only shop in Sainsbury's. It's not much to ask, is it, for a retailer to move some poorly selling magazines to a top shelf and cover them up! (Although I am bemused as to why Sainsbury's doesn't cover up FHM.)
A few years ago, when WHSmut made the decision to bring back Playboy, its then MD said that the cover of most lads mags are the same as Playboy. Yet they put Playboy on the top shelves, covered up, and the rest at the height of your average 6-7 year old. I asked WHSmut about that too but they declined to answer!
WHSmut brings back Playboy
And this was before the likes of Nuts and Zoo were being published, which pushed the boundaries even further.
Well done MN!