While magazines have been declining for a long while, they really suffer when they lose any "figurehead" associated with the magazine.
Sometimes it's the genuine loss of experience and connections, and sometimes the loss is one of public perception, which is no less important.
What is Vanity Fair without Graydon Carter, what is Playboy without Hugh Hefner, what is UK Vogue without Edward Enninful?
Whether or not you liked their work or wanted to be part of their world, each of those figureheads had their own way of making themselves the centre of the universe of their own magazine (contrast this with the reduced influence of the people now 'in charge' of Vogues) and their departures factor in, alongside financial reasons, for why the magazines have suffered.
(Given that Vanity Fair recently described Hefner's death as him having "evacuated his waxen envelope of flesh at the age of 91", it doesn't sound like they were a fan).
What is US Vogue without Anna Wintour operating in the public eye? We're told that she'll still be there, behind the scenes, making all the decisions - but if US Vogue's main figurehead is no longer front and centre, the perception of the magazine will take a massive hit. And whether or not Chloe Malle is any good, on the internet, it'll be open day on every aspect of a woman's existence.
Wintour worked hard on establishing her armoured personality, and she got to do that over the decades of a media landscape where you could choose how much publicity you wanted to garner, and often on your own terms. In contrast, Chloe is head first into the snakepit of social media.
