Racial Diversity In Modeling

[writergal28]

Back to Vogue, kimair's post about the average audience of Vogue readers (whose average income is $64, 000). So I guess this means that it is not so much appealing to the rich and white, but to a wide variety of middle class American women. I think its interest in keeping the magazine with a rich white image is that Vogue is not just selling fashion. InStyle magazine does that while also seeming to consciously down grade its image as for the masses. Vogue is selling an image, a definition of what fashion is. It is selling a lifestyle...one that is appealing to the average American. I advocate making the image more diverse because the definition of fashion and living well that it portrays is too narrow for me. Even if it wanted to stick to a definition of fashion=wealth, then it could include more people of color because there are plenty of wealthy people of color. But Vogue is stuck in high fashion as equated with high wealth and European people because it is selling this image which in turn, they believe, sells magazines. Why, because we have bought into this high fallutin' ideal as well...(someone mentioned hegemony). Ironically, even as Vogue clings to this ideal of how it defines high fashion, more and more designers are selling in places like target.

I think Vogue appeals more and more to MIDDLE AMERICA these days, based on the stats, and MIDDLE AMERICA is largely white and middle class. As the stats indicate, Town & Country readers are much wealthier (pretty much twice the annual HHI), and travel a great deal, so even IF they're mostly white, they would have been exposed to other cultures, both within the US and abroad. And because they're more exposed to other cultures, they'd be more welcoming of covers and features of non-whites. It's mostly an ignorance and exposure thing.

 

[fashionista-ta]

maybe it's time to get a few of Karma, I'll be waiting

Let us know how it goes

 

[leyla m.]

i appreciate all opinions, as long as they are in line with my own...

and Leyla, i will excuse your ignorance even though you asked me not to call you ignorant.

BTW, ignorance and stupidity are two very different things...ignorance is tied to a lack of knowledge about something due to a lack of exposure to the complexities of the issue. I referred to your ignorance because I believe that interpretation of race relations that says that we should just not care that different races/ethnicities are not represented is a bit simplistic. That said, I am sure that I am wholly ignorant as to your own background and experiences that would lead you to that opinion. I'm glad that others, who are not taking the short cut out of the discussion as I have done, are giving their opinions as well. This can only enlighten us all.

Joseph, great that you don't take things personally...keeps dialogue going and helps everyone learn something. This thread probably would've died a long time ago without your input, and wouldn't that be a shame?

Back to Vogue, kimair's post about the average audience of Vogue readers (whose average income is $64, 000). So I guess this means that it is not so much appealing to the rich and white, but to a wide variety of middle class American women. I think its interest in keeping the magazine with a rich white image is that Vogue is not just selling fashion. InStyle magazine does that while also seeming to consciously down grade its image as for the masses. Vogue is selling an image, a definition of what fashion is. It is selling a lifestyle...one that is appealing to the average American. I advocate making the image more diverse because the definition of fashion and living well that it portrays is too narrow for me. Even if it wanted to stick to a definition of fashion=wealth, then it could include more people of color because there are plenty of wealthy people of color. But Vogue is stuck in high fashion as equated with high wealth and European people because it is selling this image which in turn, they believe, sells magazines. Why, because we have bought into this high fallutin' ideal as well...(someone mentioned hegemony). Ironically, even as Vogue clings to this ideal of how it defines high fashion, more and more designers are selling in places like target.

i see, you do like to be personal. another flower for you too
i did never say i did not care about different races being represented; on the contrary. without knowing everyone else's background (and as i dont like to be personal) i am pretty certain that i have been exposed more and am more open to diversity than many people who like to pinpoint... after all this issue is with regards to the US Vogue, right? so without pointing fingers but if you wanna call someone ignorant then it shouldnt be me for sure. and trust me some people just dont want to be enlightened.. and again that isnt me. have i argued with someone, have you been able to see through my posts who i am and what life i have had? i dont think so. yet you call me ignorant. so why should i try to enlighten someone of my beliefs if they start off with an isult? i wonder

back to topic,
sofgrey said it all. some peole may not like it but Vogue knows what they are doing. if somewhere an article pops us on how a specific cover on Vogue wasnt appreciated , that certainly doesnt mean the magazine has failed... far from it. Vogue has turned into a marketing tool for many in the industry. every designer wishes to be in it, every model dreams to be on its cover... but only to promote their carreers further. nothing else really!
the magazine is just the most effective way to reach the masses. everyone has a spare £3 and can buy into the lifestyle of the oh so fabulous rolleyesfashion crowd.. so YES , its just a fashion magazine at the end of the day that is super commercial. sorry for repeating soft, but i think a lot of people think of Vogue as very artistic so i needed to repeat
having said all that as a whole i am not a fan of US Vogue anyway, with or without the cover

if naomi only knew what is going on in here..

 

[J'ador-DioR]

you know...
if you want creativity and diversity- you have to look to the less mainstream publications who are not so directly responsible to major advertisers...
mags like V and Italian Vogue...
those guys have way more freedom to break 'outside the box'...
so i would ask more about why they aren't doing it so much...

it's pretty obvious why a mainstream mag really can't take so many risks...
they have a lot more at stake...

And even those rarely feature black models these days. The last Italian Vogue cover that featured a black model was back in 2002 ( same thing with Vogue Paris)....the last time a black model had an editorial within (Vogue Italia) was Oct 06..

Whilst I've more or less accepted that blacks/asians are not considered to be the ideal cover subjects in most magazines it could potentially be balanced out by featuring black/asian models within these publications....in only-girl or group girl editorial spreads...perhaps for just 4 or 5 times a year instead of some of them just getting half a page or maybe a little mention in the beauty sections.
Out of all the Vogues....UK Vogue is possibly the worst!.
I believe the last time a black model was seen within their pages was 2003..

 

[softgrey]

^ I hear what you're saying ... lots of smaller magazines send out potential covers to a group of their subscribers for comment & tweak accordingly, I've gotten them myself. But that's why I'm so puzzled about the Marie Antoinette failure, if Vogue is doing this really effective market research.

The other thing to consider is, what is the magazine proposing. If it sends out 3 covers, and they're all celebrities, all white or ish, then there is no other choice for people to make. I just wonder what's in the pool they start with, and how imaginative they're trying to be.

Like when they do the "most admired" poll ... I believe they start with a list of names. How are those names arrived at?

the answer is VERY simple...
they are not trying to be imaginative AT ALL...
they are trying to sell ad pages by keeping their circulation numbers as high as possible...

as i said...
it is a VERY commercial endeavor...
creative editors get FIRED...
editors who keep the numbers up by following a forumula get awards...

 

[Joseph26]

editors who keep the numbers up by following a forumula get awards...

and that's why Anna Wintour is the editor of editors.

 

[iluvjeisa]

softgrey, you really pointed out just what I feel is wrong with popular culture these days altogether. They're all doing their exhaustive customer polls and listening to what people think. Well, the way it is being done is all wrong - obviously. Most people don't even know what they want until they are seduced. That's the whole point of art, and popular culture from the enthusiastic consumer's point of view. How are they going to be seduced by something the average person thought was unoffensive? They just wont be offended or disgusted, but they wont be enticed or seduced either. And we all just die from having to look at uninspired pictures some morons thought were ok on a coffee break......

 

[softgrey]

very very true...
but the competition is too stiff these days....
THERE ARE TOO MANY MAGAZINES...
all fighting for the same (and fewer ) advertising dollars..$$...

if one magazine was the only game in town...

then they could take more risks without fear of losing their advertisers...
because the advertisers would have nowhere else to go...
but with the way things are today...
there are too many other options and it's too risky...

advertisers can't afford to take risks anymore either...
because their are TOO MANY DESIGNERS and BRANDS as well...
so they can't afford to have their customers get scared off..

it's a vicious cycle...
and everything does suffer in the end...
we wallow in mediocrity....

 

[fashionista-ta]

^ There are some risky ad campaigns out there though. Benetton, Kenneth Cole, Mitchell Gold (not fashion) come to mind.

My perception of Anna Wintour is that she perceives herself to be a leader--the reality is debatable of course. ... Frieda at Gucci to me represents the commercial end of the spectrum. Whatever sells, we're all about giving it to you.

 

[eugenius]

No, I didnt read the whole thread..
No, I dont care to read the whole thread..

But back to Naomi..

Excuse me for saying this if it's already been said here before, but does anybody think that Naomi doesnt get the UK Vogue covers anymore because she's, well, OLD? Played out? Past her prime? You know--out w/ the old, in w/ the new? She's been in the industry for 20+ years: this is something she should've expected & accepted since the beginning..

Just wondering..

 

[BerlinRocks]

I remember Noemie Lenoir doing the same critic than Naomi in front of Karl Lagerfeld...
and it's funny because he talked about Naomi...
she said "ok Naomi... but it was long time ago, now..." He said "It's not about the colour skin but about the girl/woman's personnality"...
she said "bullsh*t, and you know it...Fashion is racist, that's it... you know it... there're lot of beautiful black girls in agency and don't work that much in comparison to some white girls who aren't better or more professional or with great personnality..."
Karl said "it's not true..." she said "bullsh*t!"

 

[electricladyland]

^^ Go, Noemie! That's powerful coming from a lightskinned black woman.

Excuse me for saying this if it's already been said here before, but does anybody think that Naomi doesnt get the UK Vogue covers anymore because she's, well, OLD? Played out? Past her prime? You know--out w/ the old, in w/ the new? She's been in the industry for 20+ years: this is something she should've expected & accepted since the beginning..

Naomi still looks great even if she is an older model. Although she may be over exposed. But I think the main question is Out with the old, where's the new? At least in terms of Black models.

 

[fashionista-ta]

^ Models of all skin colors seem to be pretty disposable. You could perhaps make an argument that models of color--the ones who make it--have a longer shelf life than others. Beverly Johnson ... Naomi herself is quite an example of longevity. 20 years and still on the catwalk in a business where many girls last only a few seasons. Look at Iman--she looks every bit as good now as she did in the 80s. Granted, she's not modeling, but she's still in the biz.

eugenius, in answer to your question, yes, that has been said.

Modeling is just like professional sports in that you know from day one that you're going to need a Plan B. Hopefully Naomi has found hers in this modeling agency.

 

[Northern Star]

We all know about racism in the fashion industry but will this woman ever stf up. She wants to be pleased she has had a career that has lasted so long and remember that she has had a Vogue UK cover almost every year since she started.......which most other models haven't.
Are we meant to feel sorry for her when she bullied Tyra Banks at the beginning of her career, because of jealousy and her own insecurities.
Instead of showing solidarity and support to other young black models she decided she actually wanted to be the 'only black model' around.
She makes me want to puke with her constant whingeing.
She has abused her position regularly throughout her long career and been pampered long enough and now we should sympathise with her because I'm not sure she saying all this to help the cause, I believe it is all for selfish reasons.

 

[Joseph26]

Are we meant to feel sorry for her when she bullied Tyra Banks at the beginning of her career, because of jealousy and her own insecurities.

you know it, poor Tyra, she never expected that bitchy attitude from a woman who should have been nice with her, instead of take her under her wing Naomi tried to destroy her. without success 'cause now Tyra is better than her. B)

I'm not sure she saying all this to help the cause, I believe it is all for selfish reasons.

exactly. it's pathetic how immature she is, look at Linda and Christy, there is a notorious evolution in their attitude but Naomi is still that shocking wild creature.

 

[Joseph26]

does anybody think that Naomi doesnt get the UK Vogue covers anymore because she's, well, OLD? Played out? Past her prime? You know--out w/ the old, in w/ the new? She's been in the industry for 20+ years: this is something she should've expected & accepted since the beginning..

I agree, but the truth is that Naomi is jealous of Kate Moss, Naomi sees that Kate get three UK Vogue covers annually so she wants the same. B)

 

[Gypsy_Doll]

^
facts not assumptions.

 

[Yanka]

^
facts not assumptions.

Geez, I am jelous of Kate Moss and I'm half her age and not even a model.

 

[mint condish]

Can you please try to not misquote people and assume you know what they think? It's preposterous. It is a fact that there are some magazines - whether they are fashion magazines or not - that almost exclusively have black people on the covers. That is what I was referring to - I was definitely not equating Vogue and Essence. Furthermore, I'm trying to understand the mechanisms that lead to the skewed ethnicity distribution of covers (and editorials) that we are observing. I'm not saying if it's right or wrong, but if you must know I would prefer more variety, I'm trying to understand the underlying reasons for it (and considering reasons other than blatant racism).

Black magazines in America exist because of racism against blacks in America. It is that simple. Do you know the history of racism? Slavery? Lynching? Black magazines need to exist because supposed Mainstream Fashion magazines like Vogue don't like to put non-white models into their magazines. It is so elementary and simple. Nobody needs White Essence or Ivory Magazine. All mainstream media in the U.S. is already geared to white people. This is why you need black-focused media: black channels, black television shows, black magazines, black movies. Black people are an integral part of America and need to assert their own culture and project their own voice because nobody else is going to do that for them. If these things didn't exist, we might as well go back to the time when black people had no civil rights.

 

[mint condish]

Well they have always preferred lighter-skinned people from the start. It wasn't just because fashion magazines force-fed them light-skinned models.

And here we have the implication that "people" are racist and prefer white skin "from the start". Not that influences like the media or your parents make you racist. No, of course not.

Are babies racist?
Do humans have genes inside them and brain synapses firing that make them prefer white skin?

390wrjasdfsksksksss

Sorry I died laughing and then my head collapsed onto my keyboard!