Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Magazines' started by Thread Manager, Sep 14, 2017.
Anybody know when the New UK Esquire (re) launches?
Unsure of where to post this but enjoying James Scully's commentary...
One of the likes was Samira Nasr the executive fashion director of Vanity Fair
There's a couple of current / former editors that liked...
Yet another dig at Anna Wintour’s Condé Nast.
I cannot wait for the day when Kendall Jenner / Kim appears on the cover of British Vogue. Let’s see if the tone is different by then, Mr. Scully.
At this point, all of this wreeks of bitterness.
Also, funny thing is he had so much to say about Emily Blunt’s cover while he managed to keep mum about Claire Foy’s attrocious cover. That, Mr. Scully, was a choice.
I'm more amazed at the VF stylist chiming in. Very unprofessional. This sort of thing wouldn't happen in any other industry but it's tolerated here under the guise of 'freedom of expression.' And actually, Samira is the last person to be throwing stones at others. I happen to recall her awful years of grey covers for American Elle under Robbie. So sit down!
Wait, this guy is shading the Kardashian family on the grounds of the sex tape, but I have opened his Instagram now, and most of the latest photos are of semi-naked guys with emphasis on their butts and bulges...
I remember Mr. Skully is retired now. He really has nothing to do....
I'm not a "fan" of the Karadshian/Jenner clan by any means, but Architectural Digest is a magazine that should reflect the times we're in. And these are the times we're in.
Also, readers don't want to see the same houses over and over again. I think there's nothing wrong with including a little kitsch next to something of value; sometimes to show people why the Kardashian/Jenners are considered "schund" by people of a certain elevated taste, other times to appeal to people with a particularly flashy taste. Architecture and home decor are not only for the elite anymore, the same way that fashion has become democratized over the last ten to fifteen years.
Instead of focusing on creating mock covers that come off as bitter, I'd invest my energy into creating that "great content" that I felt was missing.
And he needs to take a few seats. If he want to call out the “glorification” of Kardashians, might as well be fair about it.
Why just AD? He should’ve included at least Most of the “K clan” covers to prove his point. But alas, AD was most convenient.
Has he forgotten that the Big Hearst Magazines GLORIFY the Kardashians more than Condé Nast?
Harper’s Bazaar gave Kendall 2 covers in less than a year, and was one of Kim’s FIRST MAJOR magazine covers. Bazaar even gave KimYe a cover
Elle gave Kylie Jenner her first major cover. Elle also gave Kim 2 covers now, while giving Kendall 1.
And let’s not forget how Cosmopolitan gace the ENTIRE FAMILY a cover.
But apparently, AD giving Kris Jenner a cover is so treasonous that is had to be called out.
If he felt so strongly about the Kardashian glorification, he would’ve called it out at the very first instance. But where was he?
I could not have said EVERY single word he used better!!!! I feel exactly like him about the Fashion industry state right now with the influencers and all that ****.
He should have indeed I agree.
Right!?! I get it. He's bored, nothing constructive to do but drool at a bunch of thirst traps all day and rail against US CN. Get another hobby then. He's clearly got all that energy left to muck around and pull the work of others through the mud.
Maybe he should join our Cover Challenge thread.
The EIC of Vogue Hong Kong is Peter Wong.
Talking about the sex tape now is... a choice. In a #metoo era is not ok to try to shame Kim and the K dinasty about that video, specially when you are an advocate of the movement. I don't celebrate the family or how they got the fame that they have now, but this happened years ago and if they stay in the tabloids or magazine covers is because of something else but not the video.
Is just simple: if you don't like them, ignore them, don't buy their covers, don't follow them on social media, just focus your time and opinions -as I do- on something that you like.
I don’t know the underlying strategy behind hiring male editors for Vogue. From where I’m standing the current male editors are underperforming. The only decent male editor is Edward, and even I am not that much of a fan of his work.
Why can’t we stick with a woman editor for a women’s magazine, and a male editor for a men’s magazine.
Does that sound kinda sexist? Debateable. Not that I’m saying that male editors do not understand women. No. I refuse to discredit them in such manner. However, for me, only a woman can fully understand another woman and allow that understanding to manifest in the magazine.
Are the flock of female editors today represent that ideal? Of course not. But doesn’t mean that the solution is to hire male editors.
Call me outdated or whatever.
Completely agree with you, Mon. The way I see it there's a difference between a male stylist and a male EIC. Templer, Spencer, Bruno, Cavaco, and then the underrated Margrander at German Harper's are a group of male stylists who almost have an intrinsic understanding about women, and spinning a story around a specific woman for the editions who employ them. Most of the times they even outperform actual female stylists. But it's one thing to oversee an editorial, and another to oversee an entire magazine. Its making sure even something as overlooked as a health & wellness blurb aligns with your aesthetic. I'm not saying the idea of the encompassing male EIC is a myth, just that I don't think the ones currently in charge are equipped to do the job. Farneti is the one with the least amount of pressure. He almost doesn't even have to worry about shaping the VI woman because his magazine is more of an artistic platform than anything else. Even the front of the book is so soulless and vague, like a bunch of fluff randomly strung together.
With the March issue Edward delivered quite possibly his strongest fashion issue yet, but his woman is still not defined. Of course she's diverse and modern, but beyond that? Can you describe his woman the way you can with Alt's VP? He had the opportunity to use Naomi as a muse or template, but didn't bother to even enlist a writer to pen a feature. Naomi's edit appears only as a set of pictures in the magazine. Fierce and glamorous, but where's the copy to expand beyond that as I'm sure there are more sides to her? Is this a fashion magazine, or a women's magazine?
The ones doing a good job so far is actually Richard Dennen at Tatler. He's merely furthering on the magazine's existing template imo, with slightly modern imagery at times, but the direction is clear and concise. Arnaut from Vogue Arabia also delivers solid issues. The emphasis on written content to align with the fashion is very visible at times. So I think it is possible to have a male EIC.
I just think the modern woman for most part is looking for aspiration beyond fashion. It's really up to editors, male or female, to supply that.
Would be interesting to hear how others on here, especially women, experience these magazines edited by men.
Nina Garcia, EIC of Elle US is going under a preventive double mastectomy. Her story
Nina Garcia on Getting a Preventive Double Mastectomy
The Gentlewoman must be out next week?
U.K. Glossy Titles Post Modest Gains, and Some Losses, in Second Half of 2018
Elle U.K. was the exception to the rule, climbing 6.91 percent in the July to December period.
By Fiona Ma on February 14, 2019
LONDON — Digital circulation continues to grow, as print remains relatively stable at the big British magazine publishers, according to the latest round of figures from the U.K.’s Audit Bureau of Circulations.
In the July to December 2018 period, Condé Nast reported an increase in its circulation figures, with British Voguewitnessing a 1.1 percent increase in combined print and digital circulation to 192,152. Tatler’s combined print and digital circulation reached 79,029, a 1.2 percent increase year-on-year.
By contrast, British GQ saw a slump in total print and digital circulation figures of 4.3 percent year-on-year to 110,063. Condé said the title had struggled with its print performance on newsstands.
“Even as our digital and events audiences expand, it is gratifying to still see a solid aggregate print circulation across the business, with subscription growth helping to offset a difficult newsstand environment,” said Condé Nast Britain managing director Albert Read.
Condé Nast Traveller saw its circulation figure climb 3.7 percent to 81,002 in the period, while Vanity Fair declined 2.7 percent year-on-year to 70,080.
Elsewhere, Elle witnessed a 6.91 percent growth in the July to December period with a combined circulation figure of 162,243, while Harper’s Bazaar remained largely flat, with a 0.5 percent year-on-year increase to 116,339.
Cosmopolitan saw a significant drop in combined circulation figures of 20.6 percent. According to Hearst U.K., this was due to the price of the monthly glossy having doubled from one pound to two pounds.
“Our print ABC is positive for us, our total audience reached 14.2 million per month. I’m delighted that our total revenue is in growth, Hearst continues to go from strength to strength,” said James Wildman, chief executive officer of Hearst U.K.
TI Media, the former Time Inc. U.K. business, which was sold last year to the private equity firm Epiris, sent out a vague ABC statement, unlike Condé and Hearst, both of which provided details on performance. TI Media only provided numbers for a selection of titles, including TV Times, TV Weekly and Ideal Home.
The company, which has been on a major cost-cutting drive, failed to shed any light on Marie Claire, most likely because the former declined 3 percent to 120,133, according to the ABC’s official figures. TI Media hasn’t had much luck with its women’s glossy division over the past year.
Last spring, the company announced it was axing the local edition of InStyle once and for all, shutting down the magazine, which became digital-only in 2016. As of May 21, the InStyle U.K. web site automatically redirected to InStyle.com.