How The Internet Is Affecting the Fashion Industry

[dsamg]

In my personal opinion I feel that the Internet ruins fashion. Collections are incredibly overexposed before they have even got to stores and sometimes it feels like they are over before you can even buy them.

 

[fashion doctor]

I remember watching some NY Fashion week shows last February through streaming and thinking that I was ready for Fall 2013. I was, then, much less excited about the Spring 2013 collections because I felt that the pieces would feel "passé" or outdated. The feeling didn't last, though, once the actual clothes started appearing in stores. There's something about the being able to touch and try on the clothes that made me excited all over again. Anyone else experienced something similar?

 

[superria]

Hi! I actually really love the direction that fashion and technology are going - i think its innovative, unique, and allows for more creativity. In terms of marketing, digitalization just makes it so much easier by live streaming fashion shows, etc. Globally people can be aware about fashion brands, and stay fashion forward.

There are a couple of brands in particular who do this so well. Like Burberry, who always tops the charts as an innovator in digital fashion. There's this one about Kate Spade as well that I found really interesting - about online shopping on the streets of NY (http://fashionbi.com/newspaper/ebay-a-significant-player-in-the-fashion-industry). And here are the top brands in digital fashion so far, I saw this in Fashionista and its based on L2's Digital Index (http://fashionista.com/2011/10/here...alm-plus-the-brands-that-arent-and-should-be/). I think in my opinion, the best of the best would be Burberry and Dolce and Gabbana.

About the whole magazine from offline to online. I think it is kind of sad that the offline magazines are slowly dying. I love reading magazines as a magazine, and not through an iPad. Plus with fashion bloggers now taking the spotlight, magazine editors are losing as much hold and importance. Definitely the digital age is changing fashion, and while there are many aspects of traditional fashion that I will miss, I am still really excited to see what more they have in store for us

 

[Not Plain Jane]

I find I return to print issues of magazines more than anything I look at online, where I tend to look at something and move on to the next thing. But I constantly go back to classic issues of magazines and leaf through the pages re-studying the looks and ideas. The net moves so quickly... I just don't consume it in the same way.

Interesting points re: images or simulacra vs. the real. Baudrillard would have a field day with that tangent! Does the image murder the real? He'd say, yes.

As for fashion on the internet, the speed does tend to take the surprise out of fashion on some level, with everything being so instant - there is less mystery, less suspense, less waiting. And the knock offs sometimes hit the stores before the originals!

 

[XavierRaphael]

No idea what the future holds, but nothing beats something tangible. To have an original printed magazine means something to the person who devotes themselves to it. What if the whole technological world had a serious crash? I'll be reading a 60's Vogue in front a fireplace somewhere...no iPads allowed!

Mind you I have thought about investing in an iPad...sometimes I want the issue but I would rather not carry around a magazine, takes up unnecessary space. Buying it digitally would save me costs, but still feed my fashion drive.

 

[saann]

from wwd.com via Melancholybaby in the Business of Magazines thread

Circulation Figures for First Half Offer Digital Glimmer of Hope

THE DIGITAL GLIMMER OF HOPE: Magazine circulation figures for the first half were released Tuesday and the declines just keep coming, with some of the country’s top 25 magazines posting double-digit drops from the same time last year, including Glamour, which fell nearly 30 percent in single-copy sales.

But there’s a silver lining (phew!). The sale of digital editions, or replicas, has nearly doubled from the same period last year to an average of 10.2 million, according to the Alliance for Audited Media. They now account for 3.3 percent of total circulation.

An encouraging case study is newsweeklies, which have not benefited from a ton of good news lately, but are reaping the most benefit from digital editions. Time magazine was losing readers up until the end of 2012 — AAM’s second-half report showed a drop of 0.5 percent in overall circulation, and 23 percent in single-copy sales as compared to the same period in 2011. But in July 2012, the Apple newsstand started selling Time Inc.’s digital editions, and so far into 2013, Time has sold an average of 44,700. Overall circulation at Time is up to 3.3 million, and single-copy sales are up to an average of about 58,000, an increase of 1.2 percent. Out of those, 2.8 million are print subscribers who get the digital edition as a bundle, and about 500,000 are digital-only, according to the magazine.

Likewise, New York magazine, which revamped its digital edition in March, increased circulation by 0.9 percent to 409,000, and single copies, thanks to digital, by 23 percent. The New Yorker’s circulation is up 1.2 percent to about 1.05 million, helped by a nearly 18 percent spike in single-copy sales.

The exception is Bloomberg Businessweek, which has made provocative, conceptual covers meant to stand out at the newsstand a signature. But circulation, at nearly 991,000, is down 0.3, and newsstand, which like at all newsweeklies is a small fraction of the overall circulation makeup, fell 6.3 percent. People magazine was down at the check-out line, and by double digits, too, nearly 12 percent, while circulation fell 0.6 percent. Celebrity weeklies in general, like Us Weekly, InTouch and Life & Style, saw declines.

Overall, magazines lost about 1 percent in total circulation, with newsstand sales dropping about 10 percent.

Among the top 25 largest magazines, Good Housekeeping registered the biggest circulation jump, about 1.2 percent, to 4.4 million, and Ladies’ Home Journal was up 0.8 percent, or 3.2 million. Reader’s Digest and National Geographic had the sharpest drops, 6 and 5.4 percent, respectively.

Fashion books had a grim half at the newsstand. Cosmopolitan, ranked second-largest magazine by single-copy sales, declined 24 percent, while the drop at Glamour was 28.8 percent and 19 percent at InStyle. O, the Oprah Magazine sold about 22.7 percent fewer copies, while the percentage drop was 10.4 percent for Vogue and 11 percent for Vanity Fair. Harper’s Bazaar and Elle, which are not among the top 25 by single-copy sales, declined 12.5 and 10 percent, respectively. Game Informer is the top digital magazine, with nearly 3 million replicas, followed by Reader’s Digest and Cosmopolitan, which knocked Maxim out of the top three.

 

[NoirFemme]

I'm glad to see the internet democratizing the fashion industry (and, well, just about any other industry with high hoops to jump through and gatekeepers on Mt Olympus). I'm also glad to see that it has taken fashion back to its roots--the people. There are basic trends that almost everyone follows and/or sold in every major retailer, but unlike ten, twenty, or thirty years ago, there is no "look" that defines the 2010s because the internet allows people to find their own tribes.

The internet has opened opportunities to people to whom the mainstream would have never given a second look--plus size fashionistas like Gabi Fresh, stylish women of color mostly ignored by mainstream magazines and magazines targeted to a broad ethnic audience, and even vintage sewists who've revitalized home sewing for a new generation. The only people squabbling over this are the ones who are concerned for the size of their wallet. A true innovator, be they a high powered fashion editor, or a veteran fashion house, or a stylist, would be taking notes on how to integrate new media with their business model.

 

[glamrockgal]

well, its an internet and changing world.to be honest magazines are not dying cause of internet and blogs.have you seen september issues? they are like a big book full of fall winter ad campaigns and yes they live with their advertisers.B)

 

[DinaBella]

I for one hope paper magazines won't go away.. you know bloggers get inspiration from these magazines.. we need Vogue, we need Elle. I do think that the internet is another revenue stream into the fashion industry. I can't remember when the fashion industry has been in your face as much as it is now. So, the internet is helping to expose the industry to people who have never experienced fashion in such a way. I am a native NYer & fashion is everything there. So, now due to the internet I experience fashion the same way I did when I lived in NY. Who knows where this thing called the internet will take the fashion industry next…

 

[Bonbonenata]

I think one of reasons high end brands are switching to internet so slowly is because (many) rich people are not very tech-savvy. Yes, we see everyday Cara Delevingne and other celebrities using Instagram and etc. In reality, people who buy high end clothing are in their mid-40s or over. They have smart phones and etc, but they still prefer print magazines, "offline" stores and so on.

I think this is going to change. Next generation upper class will be tech-savvy and will expect everything to be digital.

Regards the question print or digital, my answer is "next generation digital". I think iPad made a huuge difference. It feels really intuitive to use and I find it fantastic. Like many of you I hate reading on my computer, but tablet is a whole different thing.

I believe in future taking notes, drawing and writing on magazines/books will be easier on tablets.

I actually hate print magazines. Vogue's September issue is really heavy. And because of what? Ads. Every damn page. I prefer just to toss Kindle in my bag and be able to read whatever I want wherever I am.

 

[MichaelBrian]

In a way I hope that fashion mags are not all online in the future. Generally speaking the only way to make any money in this sector online is through ads. Many people don't like ads at all, some even use adblockers. Magazines are also useful, especially if your phone/tablet battery is dead and you're on the train or something. Paper magazines are here to stay for a long while yet I think

 

[batiklover]

Well, I hope printed fashion magazines will still be around in the future. I found it very frustating to have to click at the screen to view the next page of the magazine and to wait for it appear on my screen.

Other than for magazines, I personally like where the internet is steering the fashion to. Nowadays if I want to make buy lets say a clothes from a shop abroad, I can just buy the clothes from their online and add delivery charges, much cheaper than going personally to the country to buy clothes.

Forums like these is also made thanks to the internet. I personally like to interact with people from different countries, plus I can also help promote my own native cloth to the different part of the world.

 

[ssgghh]

The internet is democratizing the fashion industry but also putting a lot of strain on it. It is in the very nature of fashion, that people long more for the rare and not the widely accessible. Which is harder and harder to find since it seems everything is there for you to see online so it makes it feel accessible vicariously. And so the appeal of it wears off quicker. So the race with time for designers is even harder than ever.

Internet makes fashion feel instant when its actually not , like somebody mentioned watching fw makes you want that instead of ss that will be available soon. But I think the form of fashion shows and seasons is definitely something that needs to adapt to new times, because it just does not feel that relevant any more, its a relic of old times, when it made perfect sense to have closed off shows showing certain people in the know what is up next. In their essence was exclusivity and there is no other way than to slowly give up the exclusivity by doing live-streamings and whatnot.
It is going to take a while for the big, established fashion infrastructures to change (because of the money invested in them it is natural they are resisting certain changes), but there is a parallel development that was made possible with the internet and I think the future will be whatever forms from that.

Magazines will have to find new ways to attract buyers as well, because right now they aren´t offering anything that you wouldn´t be able to experience online. Maybe focusing more on the physicality would be the way, because being tangible is the only thing they have going for them in the battle with the internet, and I don`t think they are exploring it enough.

 

[NataliaShopSnap]

The internet is democratizing the fashion industry but also putting a lot of strain on it. It is in the very nature of fashion, that people long more for the rare and not the widely accessible. Which is harder and harder to find since it seems everything is there for you to see online so it makes it feel accessible vicariously. And so the appeal of it wears off quicker. So the race with time for designers is even harder than ever.

Internet makes fashion feel instant when its actually not , like somebody mentioned watching fw makes you want that instead of ss that will be available soon. But I think the form of fashion shows and seasons is definitely something that needs to adapt to new times, because it just does not feel that relevant any more, its a relic of old times, when it made perfect sense to have closed off shows showing certain people in the know what is up next. In their essence was exclusivity and there is no other way than to slowly give up the exclusivity by doing live-streamings and whatnot.
It is going to take a while for the big, established fashion infrastructures to change (because of the money invested in them it is natural they are resisting certain changes), but there is a parallel development that was made possible with the internet and I think the future will be whatever forms from that.

Magazines will have to find new ways to attract buyers as well, because right now they aren´t offering anything that you wouldn´t be able to experience online. Maybe focusing more on the physicality would be the way, because being tangible is the only thing they have going for them in the battle with the internet, and I don`t think they are exploring it enough.

I love the democratization of it. It's about time because I hate fashion's snootiness. Fashion should be accessible but ultimately it's an art and as such it takes time to do right and a certain aesthetic. There is something that can be done for all this however. I'm pretty sure that new ways of making things rare should be invented. I really like what you're doing with your line for example. Handmade and in limited quantities is a good way to tackle this. It is so much more personal and that is exactly what we're losing with all the mass produce crap. Compare with the olden times when you would go to a tailor with whom you had a relationship and they would custom make it for you. Then you would wear it for years if not decades. That has been lost and I wish there was a way to bring it back.

 

[rt1970]

I think one of reasons high end brands are switching to internet so slowly is because (many) rich people are not very tech-savvy. Yes, we see everyday Cara Delevingne and other celebrities using Instagram and etc. In reality, people who buy high end clothing are in their mid-40s or over. They have smart phones and etc, but they still prefer print magazines, "offline" stores and so on.

I'm one of those "mid-40s" so I'll chime in here. I consider myself pretty tech savvy: I started out with a Commodore 64 when I was a kid and went from there (my bread-and-butter job involves web content, dealing with CMS backends, etc). I believe the internet has done a great deal for fashion. It has democratized it in a sense. Gone are the days when we had to wait on Elsa Klensch to reveal the latest from the catwalk weeks after the shows. Now we can go to Style.com - or even TFS - days, even hours after the shows to find out what is (or will be) hot.

With that said, I have to admit that I am a hopeless, tactile romantic. There's something about my fingers touching actual pages that sparks excitement in me. Reading about designers, new lines, etc on paper signals "gravitas" to me for some strange reason. Not that I don't have respect for the web: I love it. It's just that there's an indescribable pleasure that comes from sitting down with an actual Financial Times paper during brunch on Sundays and reading what Vanessa Friedman has to say.:-)

But again, I'm over 40!

 

[NataliaShopSnap]

....
With that said, I have to admit that I am a hopeless, tactile romantic. There's something about my fingers touching actual pages that sparks excitement in me. Reading about designers, new lines, etc on paper signals "gravitas" to me for some strange reason. Not that I don't have respect for the web: I love it. It's just that there's an indescribable pleasure that comes from sitting down with an actual Financial Times paper during brunch on Sundays and reading what Vanessa Friedman has to say.:-)

But again, I'm over 40!

Nothing to do with over 40 :-) Feel the same about the tactile experience and internet. IMO the future is merging of the two specifically more so with mobile devices and wearables.

 

[rt1970]

Nothing to do with over 40 :-) Feel the same about the tactile experience and internet. IMO the future is merging of the two specifically more so with mobile devices and wearables.

True. But I think the mobile device / wearable movement needs to break away from the sports base. For example, I read an article on WWD about wearable tech in which most of the examples tracked movement. There was a mention of something called "Intimacy 2.0," in which the fabric becomes more translucent depending on the wearers - uh - mood. Should be interesting!

 

[LRlovesDaria]

Dior Cruise 2015 Rule...I think it's quite on the topic

instagram/rihplays

 

[rt1970]

Dior Cruise 2015 Rule...I think it's quite on the topic

Oh that's classic!

 

[GiaNiSu]

Does anyone know why luxury fashion brands were so averse to digital marketing in the beginning? Or to web commerce? I think that it could have had something to do with wanting to preserve the brands and their prestige or legacy, but I'd love to hear other opinions on that. I know, from a presentation, that LV's Arnauld was averse to listing prices on the LV website for years after it was created, for fear of taking away from the experience of seeing and taking in the quality -- as opposed to being driven by the prices.