The Business of Magazines | Page 268 | the Fashion Spot

The Business of Magazines

Discussions I've seen this week have at times made me question by own convictions a bit, and why I feel the compulsive need to defend Anna and Vogue. I'm not sure why, but I know I've been doing it for a long time, when the charges against her were often things like being too commercial or putting too many celebrities on the cover, not racism. That Kerry Washington never got a cover is absurd to me, I agree with you there. And I wish Tracee had gotten one too, because she's glorious. There are a number of very famous women that, despite longevity, popularity, high-profile brand deals, and/or awards recognition remain conspicuously absent from the cover of Vogue. Many are woman of color (Lucy Liu, Tracee Ellis Ross, Jessica Alba, Sofia Vergara, Regina King, and Kerry Washington, to name a few) and many are not (Kate Beckinsale, Miley Cyrus, Rachel McAdams, Brie Larson, Mila Kunis, Olivia Wilde). I do wonder what goes into the reasoning behind Anna choosing her favorites. I am not Black, so perhaps tokenism is harder for me to spot or I don't understand the concept fully. But to me it looks alot like the early 2000s where there were consecutive years of no POC on the cover, and then one Liya Kebede cover to fill a quota. Or the models covers, even up until recently where there'd be a group of several models, all white except 1. But in the last two or so years there's been Rihanna, Deepika Padukone, Cardi B, Zendaya, Doona Bae, Ugbad Abdi, Adut Akech, Lupita Nyong'o, Priyanka Chopra, Amal Alamuddin Clooney, Rihanna again, Serena Williams and her daughter Olympia, Beyonce. That is a significant change. I believe in the last few years, Black women are no longer statistically underrepresented on the cover of Vogue or inside the magazine, in terms of editorial casting or with the writers/artists/celebrities/change-makers the magazine chooses to highlight.

In terms of staffing, that's a different matter but I do believe Anna has helped champion women and People of Color at Conde Nast. With the increasing influence she had at Conde Nast in the last decade, many new magazine appointments were made. Radhika Jones at Vanity Fair, Elaine Marie Welteroth at Teen Vogue, Michelle Lee at Allure, Hanya Yanagihara at T, likely Edward Enninful at W was something she advocated for. Those those are just editors in chief. Samira Nasr's role as executive fashion editor at VF is even possibly something Anna, as creative director at CN, signed off on. Leaders have to take broad responsibility, I understand that. But how many of the complaints former employees had, be it coworker bullying, HR issues, lack of compensation, coworker ignorance and insensitivity, etc. were things Anna would have known about or had direct control over? Yes she works at Vogue but she also had CDFA, the Met, Artistic Director at CN, Global Content Advisor at CN. I get the sense she's barely in the office and certainly not involved in the minutiae. The overall message seems to be that the entire industry is classist and racist (and that's undeniably true, historically, but from my limited perspective there are massive steps forward happening all the time), yet the same people who deny Anna's influence, relevance, or power within the industry are the ones scapegoating her. That, I don't understand. And if Vogue lacks the prestige or desirability it once had, why are many thousands of people online photoshopping its masthead onto their photos. There's no #ElleChallenge.
 
Last edited:
There are a number of very famous women that, despite longevity, popularity, high-profile brand deals, and/or awards recognition remain conspicuously absent from the cover of Vogue. Many are woman of color (Lucy Liu, Tracee Ellis Ross, Jessica Alba, Sofia Vergara, Regina King, and Kerry Washington, to name a few) and many are not (Kate Beckinsale, Miley Cyrus, Rachel McAdams, Brie Larson, Mila Kunis, Olivia Wilde).

Precisely, and that was the crux of my comment. I found it incredible and extremely short-sighted to dismiss Anna's efforts or predict her downfall purely because she failed to give covers to certain women, in general.

Btw, Rachel does have a Vogue cover. A January one, I recall the magazine being physically slim.
 
Oops, Rachel’s cover totally slipped my mind! Replace her with, I dunno, Carrie Underwood, or Nicki Minaj, or Mindy Kaling, or Amy Poehler, or Emma Thompson or any number of highly successful, recognizable, award winning celebrities Anna chose to bypass in favor of Blake and Lupita and Rihanna and Reese and Sienna again and again.
 
Anna Wintour Isn’t Going To Cancel Herself
Vogue’s editor is now promising to do better for Black employees and readers. Does she not realize that she, largely alone, had all the power all along?


Scaachi Koul

Amid the great racial reckoning happening this week, no one, not even the most powerful editors in media, is immune. Yesterday, Ginia Bellafante speculated in a New York Times column about whether Vogue editor-in-chief and Condé Nast artistic director Anna Wintour might follow Bon Appétit’s Adam Rapoport out the door, after staff and readers have raised serious concerns about toxic and racist cultures at both magazines.

“Within the Condé Nast framework, autocratic bosses were left to do whatever they pleased — subjugating underlings to hazing rituals with no seeming end point,” she writes, and “no one at Condé Nast has had more of an outsize reputation for imperiousness wed to native talent than Anna Wintour.” In her column, Bellafante describes conversations with employees of color at Condé Nast: “They struggled to be heard or get the resources they needed to do their jobs at the highest levels; they faced ignorance and lazy stereotyping from white bosses when the subject of covering black culture came up; they all said they were exhausted by always having to explain it all.”


The article dropped just a few hours after Anna Wintour apologized for Vogue’s lack of Black representation in her 30-plus-year history with the magazine. “I know Vogue has not found enough ways to elevate or give space to Black editors, writers, photographers, designers, and other creators,” her letter to her staff read. “We have made mistakes too, publishing images or stories that have been hurtful or intolerant. I want to take full responsibility for those mistakes.” She went on to add that “it can’t be easy to be a Black employee at Vogue” and that the company “will do better.”

The statement is fine, insofar as superficial statements about racism and diversity at the most famous fashion magazine can go. But there’s also a kind of strange passivity in the way Wintour addressed the issue. The words “I know Vogue has not found enough ways to elevate or give space” to Black people fall flat, because Anna Wintour is Vogue. It’s not a mystery why the magazine has failed to put more than a handful of Black women on its cover, or why there are so few Black people working there, or why Wintour’s former friend and colleague André Leon Talley has been speaking publicly about how hard it was to work at Vogue. She’s the most powerful woman editor in media and — unlike almost every other working editor — operates beyond professional reproach. She is all-powerful at the expense of many; it’s an aura that she’s worked long and hard to build. Vogue’s failures (along with its successes) are her burden to bear.


At Vogue, Wintour is nothing short of a tyrant. This isn’t even an insult; rather, she has spent decades methodically constructing an environment of fear in her workplace. There are rumors about how unfriendly she is to anyone she deems unworthy and how dismissive she is to fat people (How many plus-size women have been in Vogue, let alone gotten a cover?). When she ran British Vogue from 1985 to 1987, she earned the nickname “Nuclear Wintour.” In The September Issue, the 2009 documentary that followed Wintour and her staff as they prepared the September issue of the magazine, she confirms her reputation. She’s rude with her staff, harsh in editorial meetings, and her team seem to be perpetually on the brink of a mental breakdown because they know how exacting, uncompromising, and often cruel Wintour can be. She even body-shames the camera operator. “I think she enjoys not being completely approachable,” Grace Coddington, Vogue’s creative director from 1988 to 2016, told 60 Minutes in 2010. (But, of course, I would be remiss if I didn’t remind us all of the ***** jars Coddington has in her kitchen.)

In Talley’s recent memoir, The Chiffon Trenches, the stories about Wintour’s cruelty toward one of her very, very few Black employees are practically endless. (This despite the fact that Talley was both famous and influential as a Vogue editor-at-large.) She ignored him at key moments in his career, treated him like an assistant at her own wedding, rode him about his weight gain even after his grandmother had just died, forbade him from bringing a guest to the Met Gala, and paid Talley a paltry (this is Vogue, after all) $500 per episode for a podcast he hosted.


“The Empress Wintour, in her power, has disappointed me in her humanity,” he wrote in his book. “Our friendship has layered with thick rust over the years. … I am no longer of value to her.” Following her apology this week, Talley remains unmoved. “She’s part of an environment of colonialism,” he recently told Sandra Bernhard on her Sirius XM show. “She is entitled and I do not think she will ever let anything get in the way of her white privilege.”

None of Wintour’s elitism, her refusal to feature different body types or skin colors in the magazine, or her harshness with her employees was a secret. After all, it wasn’t until 2018, when Beyoncé graced the September issue of Vogue, that Tyler Mitchell became the first Black person to shoot the cover — a request from Beyoncé herself. (To get a Black person to shoot the cover of Vogue, you apparently have to be one of the most powerful Black women in the world.)


The 2006 movie The Devil Wears Prada, adapted from the novel by the same name, which was based in part on Lauren Weisberger’s experience working for Wintour, earned positive reviews in part because it humanizes a Wintour-type boss — a woman who stomps on everyone, who dismisses those with a different opinion, who needs to win at all costs. She has no friends, but she has her work. And yet, she is admirable, played by American icon Meryl Streep, who even got an Oscar nomination for the role, and whose infamous cerulean speech has been both praised and now thoroughly debunked.

Wintour has built her entire career on the foundation of fetishizing white-woman meanness. This isn’t to say she’s untalented or unworthy of the job, but it does speak to the culture she brings to a brand like Vogue, or frankly, to Condé Nast as a company at large. Wintour’s persona isn’t just of a boss that’s tough to please, but of a woman boss who’s just as awful as a man could be. It’s an earlier, less PR-optimized incarnation of the Nasty Woman/Girl Boss modus operandi: the idea that being authoritarian or contemptuous at work is feminist, because if men get to do it, why can’t women?

Wintour embraces a version of femininity that says you have to be skinny, white, elegant, aloof, and rich. If you don’t have any of those qualities naturally, you have to work hard toward them: eat less if you’re too big, conform to Eurocentric beauty standards if you’re Black, act mean, never crack a smile. There’s a whole generation of young women who watched Sex and the City and thought Carrie Bradshaw’s affection for Vogue and its tenents was something to vie for, instead of creepy and desperate. “Sometimes I would buy Vogue instead of dinner,” she says in one episode. “I felt it fed me more.” (You know what feeds you more than Vogue? All foods.)

Wintour might be unique in how powerful she is, but you can trace her influence across many industries, not just media. The company founded on a singular woman’s cult of personality can be seen in brands as disparate as Thinx, Nasty Gal, Glossier, and the women’s coworking space The Wing, founded by Audrey Gelman. But there is a clear distinction between women like Wintour and those like Gelman: Wintour found power in being icy, while third-wave “feminist” bosses learned to hide their harshness behind public displays of feminist solidarity.

So it’s disingenuous for Wintour to now act like she’s just one cog in a big, anti-Black machine. The allure of Wintour is in her all-encompassing power; if you want something to happen at Vogue, you need Anna’s permission. (Even the creator of The Hills knew that if he wanted Lauren Conrad to get that Teen Vogue internship, he’d have to sell Wintour on it in a closed-door meeting first.) Her entire brand is about her unwillingness to compromise, but with that come questions around how she chooses to wield her power. There is no other reason why Vogue’s culture is apparently so hostile to the Black people who work there or want to work there. Three decades into her tenure, the magazine functions entirely by her design, and the publisher is so heavily influenced by her that it’s nearly impossible to imagine a Condé Nast without her as the artistic director and global content adviser.

Nearly every publication in American media is having to confront its failures when it comes to hiring, promoting, and retaining Black employees. They all require a seismic shift in their office cultures. And Wintour may, publicly, express a desire to see Vogue become a more inclusive magazine and workplace. But it seems that Wintour is not about to sacrifice her own privilege or position in order to further Vogue’s progress. That she only took a 20% pay cut as Condé Nast embarked on drastic cost-cutting measures and layoffs related to the pandemic (meager considering her reportedly $2 million salary), and that even now, per Condé Nast CEO Roger Lynch, she refuses to resign, speaks to her extreme reluctance to relinquish any of her power. A boss like Anna Wintour will have to be dragged from her desk, French Revolution–style.


If her whole brand is being an ice queen, then how reliable is a Wintour apology? Condé Nast and the fashion industry at large have permitted her to be like this, seemingly without any consequences, despite repeatedly failing to make her workplace even remotely comfortable for Black people. Her words are hard to take at face value because she has no record of amending her behavior; in fact, Wintour’s whole bag is doing it her way, critics be damned.

In her half-hearted apology, Wintour implies that she’s merely been a passive participant in a media institution that rarely gives Black people any work, any compensation, or any credit. She’s not fooling anyone and should just admit the truth: Vogue is like this because Wintour designed it to be. If she ever did finally leave the company, it’s unclear how the magazine could ever proceed without Wintour at the helm because so much of it is influenced by her. But maybe that’s the point. Perhaps it’s time for Anna Wintour’s Vogue to finally come to an end, and make way for something new.
source | buzzfeednews
 
It seems like they have their favorite...
Suddenly, I wonder if they would have voiced those allegations if Gan was involved with Prada/MiuMiu.

I wish people had the same energy with calling Diet Prada out for their apparent biais.

Diet Prada has an agent - guessing Prada proactively paid them off :innocent:
 
Can Anna Wintour survive fashion's reckoning with racism?
While Condé Nast has said the Vogue editor-in-chief will not be stepping down, turmoil has been mounting as employees past oand present speak out


Edward Helmore Sat 13 Jun 2020

For decades she has stood astride the fashion industry, micro-managing the look and content of US Vogue, marshaling a significant part of the global fashion industry to her worldview, and presiding over a annual gala which, at $25,000 a head, paying guests and favored courtiers mounted lavishly-carpeted steps of Metropolitan Museum of Art to symbolically kiss the ring.


But for Anna Wintour this has been her annus horribilis. New York fashion week has been written off, the Met Gala has been cancelled, magazine advertising revenues are plummeting and there are scarcely any frocks to shoot since the coronavirus barged its way into the European fashion shows in February.

Yet now a crisis is breaking over Wintour, Vogue and the Condé Nast publishing empire: the reckoning with racism in America, triggered by the killing of George Floyd by a white police officer in Minneapolis, that has now spread to all aspects of American life, from publishing to academia to sports.

Last week, Condé Nast, the publisher of Vogue and other lifestyle glossy publications, was hit by charged criticism for failures to support diversity in both the workplace and in terms of the content it typically publishes. With two senior editors leaving over racial insensitivity, and former employees describing Vogue workplace as fearful, accounts of discrimination in the New York office of Condé Nast flood out.


Speculation mounted last week that Wintour’s position as Vogue’s editor-in-chief, as well as the publisher’s US artistic director and “global content adviser”, could be becoming untenable after several employees spoke out about racial discrimination in the workplace and pay inequities.

On Friday, Condé Nast’s top executive convened a town hall meeting of employees to say that Wintour would not be stepping down.


“There are very few people in the world who can have the influence on change and culture, as it relates to the activities that our business has, than Anna,” Condé Nast’s CEO, Roger Lynch, said. “The reason she is here is because she can help influence the change that we need to make, and I know she is committed to it.”

Mounting turmoil at the publisher in recent days has included the resignation of Adam Rapoport, the editor in chief of Bon Appétit magazine who reported to Wintour, over Instagram photos of Rapoport and his wife in a Latino version of brownface at a Halloween party in 2013. A public apology said staff members conceded that the magazine “continued to tokenize” the people of color that it did hire.

That was quickly followed by the exit of Condé Nast’s head of lifestyle video programming, Matt Duckor, after staffers claimed that Condé Nast failed to feature people of color in videos and did not pay them for appearances. A number of Duckor’s tweets with racist and homophobic comments were recirculated online.

On Thursday, Wintour attempted to quell the tide of protest when she admitted to making mistakes and publishing material that has been intolerant, as well as not doing enough to promote black staff and designers at the magazine. Wintour apologized to staff for “publishing images or stories that have been hurtful or intolerant” and admitted there were too few employees of color.


“I want to say plainly that I know Vogue has not found enough ways to elevate and give space to black editors, writers, photographers, designers and other creators. We have made mistakes too, publishing images or stories that have been hurtful or intolerant. I take full responsibility for those mistakes.”

But the letter was met with scorn by an African American former member of Vogue’s staff. Former colleague and ally André Leon Talley shared his views on Wintour’s email in a podcast interview.

“[Wintour’s] statement came out of the space of white privilege,” Talley said. “I want to say one thing: Dame Anna Wintour is a colonial broad, she’s a colonial dame, she comes from British, she’s part of an environment of colonialism. She is entitled and I do not think she will ever let anything get in the way of her white privilege.”

Others have followed suit with damning portrayals of the treatment of minorities within the company.


Former staffer Shelby Ivey Christie wrote on Twitter: “My time at Vogue, at Condé Nast, was the most challenging + miserable time of my career – The bullying + testing from white counterparts, the completely thankless work, the terrible base pay + the racism was exhausting.”

Wintour’s position may be further undermined by the appointment of Samira Nasr, formerly of Vanity Fair, as the first female black editor of rival Harper’s Bazaar. “As the proud daughter of a Lebanese father and Trinidadian mother, my worldview is expansive and is anchored in the belief that representation matters,” said Nasr in a video message.


British Vogue also has a minority editor, Edward Enninful, who has done much to steer the magazine away from predominantly featuring white subject material. In the current issue, Enninful commissioned a series of powerful portraits by Jamie Hawkesworth of women, often minorities, and often working in healthcare and other essential services on the frontlines of the Covid-19 pandemic.

The turmoil at Condé Nast comes as the magazine industry, as well as publishing in general, has been slammed by coronavirus-related advertising revenue drops of about 45%. In recent years, the publisher has cut or reduced publication of several titles and sublet six of its 23 floors at 1 World Trade Center.

Wintour will be hoping Condé Nast’s 10-member board of directors, headed by Lynch and made up by members of the Newhouse family and two independent directors, including former Gucci CEO Domenico De Sole, continue to stand behind her, as they have for decades.

But some observers are not so sure.


“Fashion comes and goes,” one former glossy magazine editor, who declined to be identified, told the Guardian. “Magazine publishing and fashion were in deep trouble before all this. Will Anna get washed away in that flood? Probably.”
source | theguardian
 
A Reckoning at Condé Nast
“It’s hard to be a person of color at this company,” a staff member said. In response to an uprising, Anna Wintour and the chief executive, Roger Lynch, offered apologies.


By Edmund Lee June 13, 2020

This was supposed to be Condé Nast’s year.

The publisher of Vogue, Vanity Fair and The New Yorke was going to be profitable again after years of layoffs and losses.

Then advertising revenue suddenly dropped as the coronavirus pandemic cratered the economy. More recently, as protests against racism and police violence grew into a worldwide movement, company employees publicly complained about racism in the workplace and in some Condé Nast content.

In response, the two leaders of the nearly all-white executive team — the artistic director, Anna Wintour, and the chief executive, Roger Lynch — offered apologies to the staff.

At an all-hands online meeting on Friday, employees asked if Ms. Wintour, the top editor of Vogue since 1988 and the company’s editorial leader since 2013, would be leaving. Mr. Lynch and the communications chief, Danielle Carrig, shot down the question, saying Ms. Wintour was not going anywhere, said three people who attended the meeting but were not authorized to discuss it publicly.

Tumult has hit Condé Nast, a company built partly on selling a glossy brand of elitism to the masses, at a time when its financial outlook is grim. Last year, the U.S. division lost approximately $100 million on about $900 million in revenue, said several people with knowledge of the company, who were not authorized to speak publicly. The European arm also had losses.

Mr. Lynch said in an interview Friday that he was “not familiar” with the cited figures, adding that the company’s merger of its domestic and international operations, part of a recent restructuring, had been costly.

In April, the company instituted pay cuts for anyone making over $100,000. Then came layoffs — 100 jobs gone out of roughly 6,000.

Condé Nast is one of many media organizations, including The New York Times, whose employees have questioned company leaders as people around the world have taken part in protests prompted by the killing of George Floyd, a black man who died last month in Minneapolis after a white police officer pinned him to the ground.

The company has been led by the Newhouse family since 1959. Steven Newhouse heads the parent company, Advance, and his cousin Jonathan Newhouse is chairman of Condé Nast’s board. Advance also controls more than 40 newspapers and news sites across the country. Many of them, including The Plain Dealer of Cleveland and The Star-Ledger in Newark, have struggled. The Newhouse family has protected itself against losses with significant investments in the cable giant Charter and the media conglomerate Discovery.

Before the internet took readers away from print, Condé Nast was known for thick magazines edited by cultural arbiters who traveled in the same circles as the people they covered. As digital media rose, Condé Nast was slow to adapt. Budgets tightened. Magazines including Gourmet, Mademoiselle and Details folded.

By the time Mr. Lynch, a former head of the music streaming service Pandora, succeeded Robert A. Sauerberg as the chief executive last year, Condé Nast was in triage mode. After his arrival, it unloaded three publications: Brides, Golf Digest and W.

On Monday, Condé Nast reckoned with how the company deals with issues related to race. Adam Rapoport, the longtime top editor of Bon Appétit, resigned after a photo surfaced on social media showing him in a costume that stereotypically depicted Puerto Rican dress.

He apologized to staff members in a videoconference. After Mr. Rapoport left the call, the staff voiced complaints about the Bon Appétit workplace. Some minority employees said they had been used as ethnic props in Bon Appétit’s videos, a growing segment of the Condé Nast business.

“It’s so hard to be a person of color at this company,” said Ryan Walker-Hartshorn, a black woman who worked as an assistant to Mr. Rapoport. “My blood is still boiling.”

She recalled a 2018 meeting of editors to discuss how to make the magazine’s Instagram account more diverse. In a room of about eight editors, three were people of color.

“And we’re all very junior, no power,” Ms. Walker-Hartshorn said in an interview. “I was like, ‘You’re asking us how to make our Instagram black without hiring more black people?’”

At a company forum on Tuesday, Mr. Lynch said Bon Appétit employees should have raised their concerns earlier, a comment that rubbed many the wrong way. In a closed-door session later that day, he apologized to a group of staff members who had pushed for Mr. Rapoport’s ouster.

“I want you to know I take this personally, and I take personal responsibility for it,” he said, according to an audio recording of the meeting obtained by The New York Times.

A onetime banker at Morgan Stanley, Mr. Lynch spent much of his career at Dish, the satellite TV service. As a hobby he played lead guitar in a classic-rock cover band, the Merger. He moved from San Francisco to New York and updated his wardrobe to join Condé Nast.

Mr. Lynch, 57, has emphasized diversity efforts and environmental programs in emails to the staff. He said in the interview on Friday that he was developing an overall company strategy as he assembled his executive team. In December he hired Deirdre Findlay as the chief marketing officer, making her the company’s highest-ranking black executive.

His former executive assistant, Cassie Jones, who is black, quit shortly after he gave her a gift she considered insulting, three people with knowledge of the matter said.

In November, after she had spent four months working for him, Mr. Lynch called Ms. Jones into his office and handed her “The Elements of Style,” a guide to standard English usage by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White. Mr. Lynch said he thought she could benefit from it.

With its suggestion that her own language skills were lacking, the gift struck Ms. Jones as a microaggression, the people said. A few days later, she quit. Before leaving the headquarters at 1 World Trade in Lower Manhattan, she placed the book on his desk.

Mr. Lynch said he hadn’t meant to insult Ms. Jones, who declined to comment for this article. “I really only had the intention — like every time I’ve given it before — for it to be a helpful resource, as it has been for me,” he said. “I still use it today. I’m really sorry if she interpreted it that way.”

Before Mr. Lynch’s arrival, David Remnick, the editor in chief of The New Yorker, objected to a plan that would have lowered the magazine’s subscription price and raised ad rates. He has brought aboard a diverse crew of journalists, including Jia Tolentino, Hua Hsu and Vinson Cunningham, while adding digital subscriptions.

Three people with knowledge of the company said The New Yorker was likely to surpass Vogue as Condé Nast’s biggest contributor to U.S. profits by the end of 2020. The people added that about 80 percent of The New Yorker’s revenue came from readers, which helped the magazine weather the advertising downturn. The magazine did not cut staff during the recent layoffs.

On June 4, Ms. Wintour sent an apologetic note to the Vogue staff. “I want to say this especially to the Black members of our team — I can only imagine what these days have been like,” Ms. Wintour wrote.

She added, “I want to say plainly that I know Vogue has not found enough ways to elevate and give space to Black editors, writers, photographers, designers and other creators. We have made mistakes, too, publishing images or stories that have been hurtful or intolerant. I take full responsibility for those mistakes.”

The British-born Ms. Wintour has been credited internally for championing Radhika Jones, one of few top editors of color in the company’s history.

Ms. Jones, the former editorial director of the book department at The Times who took over Vanity Fair from Graydon Carter in 2017, changed the magazine’s identity. The first cover subject she chose, for the April 2018 issue, was the actress and producer Lena Waithe, a black woman photographed by Annie Leibovitz in a plain T-shirt. Later covers featured Michael B. Jordan, Janelle Monae and Lin-Manuel Miranda. Ms. Jones has put out 16 Vanity Fair covers featuring people of color.

When Ms. Jones arrived, she was pilloried by fashion insiders who questioned her style sense. Her choice of legwear — tights with illustrated foxes — drew stares, according to a report in Women’s Wear Daily. Ms. Wintour later showed her support for Ms. Jones at a welcome party by handing out gifts: tights with foxes on them.

At a quarterly meeting of company executives in April 2019, on Mr. Lynch’s second day at Condé Nast, Ms. Jones presented her plan for Vanity Fair’s fall issues, a prime landing spot for fashion and luxury advertisers. (From September to December last year, the Vanity Fair covers featured Kristen Stewart, Lupita Nyong’o, Joaquin Phoenix, and Chrissy Teigen, John Legend and their children.)

Two executives criticized Ms. Jones’s plan, according to three people who were at the meeting and were not authorized to discuss it publicly. In particular, Susan Plagemann, the chief business officer of Condé Nast’s style division, challenged Ms. Jones at length, saying the plan would be difficult to sell to advertisers. To defuse the tension, Ms. Wintour banged her fist on the table, saying, “We need to move on,” according to the three people who were at the meeting.

Ms. Plagemann, who is white, joined the company in 2010 as Vogue’s chief business officer and worked closely with Ms. Wintour; in 2018, she was elevated to her current job. Three people with knowledge of the matter said she was vocal about her negative view of Vanity Fair under its new editor.

She had criticized Ms. Jones’s choices of cover subjects, telling others at the company that the magazine should feature “more people who look like us,” two of the people said. A third person said he had heard her use words expressing a similar sentiment. All the people said they interpreted the phrase and similar remarks as referring to well-off white women who adopt an aesthetic common among the fashion set.

In the interview on Friday, Mr. Lynch addressed Ms. Jones’s stewardship of the magazine more broadly. “The challenge with her taking that new direction would be alienating some of the traditional Vanity Fair audience,” he said. “I really applaud what she’s done.”

The uprising at Condé Nast was overdue, some staff members said. “We’ve been asking for change for months now,” Sohla El-Waylly, an assistant editor at Bon Appétit, said in an interview.

In the Tuesday meeting with Bon Appétit staff members, Mr. Lynch said he hoped to prove a commitment to diversity with the choice of Mr. Rapoport’s replacement. Later in the call, he suggested that some staff members wanted to hurt Bon Appétit financially to bring about change, a comment that irked some in the meeting.

Mr. Lynch said in the interview that he had meant to underscore the urgency of the matter. “I wanted to make sure they understood the brand they worked so hard to build was actually being harmed, and I think I even apologized to them in that meeting,” he said.

A Bon Appétit personality, Claire Saffitz, has generated over 200 million views with “Gourmet Makes,” a show in which she makes homemade versions of Twinkies and other junk food. She represents a new kind of Condé Nast, one built on a kind of rough-cut authenticity, but her popularity has drawn attention to the problem of representation.

“We’ve been asking for change for months now,” said Sohla El-Waylly, an assistant editor at Bon Appétit.Francesco Sapienza for The New York Times

Ms. El-Waylly, who was a regular guest on the show, said her addition to “Gourmet Makes” had been cynically motivated. “They just want me there to play the part to make it look like they have people of color on staff,” she said.

She said she was not paid for her appearances, as her white counterparts were. Condé Nast disputed that and said Ms. El-Waylly’s salary covered her video appearances.

On Wednesday, the company’s head of video, Matt Duckor, stepped down. Several employees had accused him of bias. Many people at the company are rooting for more change.

“What’s crazy is what it took for this stuff to happen,” Ms. Walker-Hartshorn said. “It took George Floyd.”
source | nytimes
 
Ms. Wintour banged her fist on the table, saying, “We need to move on,” according to the three people who were at the meeting.

Oh, Anna.
giphy.gif
 
In November, after she had spent four months working for him, Mr. Lynch called Ms. Jones into his office and handed her “The Elements of Style,” a guide to standard English usage by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White. Mr. Lynch said he thought she could benefit from it.

She had criticized Ms. Jones’s choices of cover subjects, telling others at the company that the magazine should feature “more people who look like us,” two of the people said. A third person said he had heard her use words expressing a similar sentiment. All the people said they interpreted the phrase and similar remarks as referring to well-off white women who adopt an aesthetic common among the fashion set


wow
 
Personally I never saw that image of Gaga as being an attempt to alter the look of her race or heritage, or even play off another’s. I always saw it as a sort of play on the trashy, very heavily tanned look of someone like Donatella, leathered and out in the sun for too long. Perhaps I read it entirely wrong at the time?

Yeah I never saw it that way too. It’s a play on the whole trashy celebrity Jersey Shore thing that was prevalent when she released her debut.

That’s funny about Stephen because he’s a person of color too—he’s Filipino. I get that anyone could be racist but he should be at the very least aware of the struggle and how difficult it is to make it. Although he came from a privileged background so there’s that.
 
I would love to have a black editor working for VP or even an Arab editor.

Uhm, Dan Sablon. I want him at VP so bad, and not only because he's black, but because I believe he'll have a different, modern perspective. Even if it's a smaller, regular placement like Miss Vogue (after they've upgraded Virginie to cover edits). Pipe dream, I know.
I think diversity would need to be more aggressively enforced in European editions than the UK/US editions because of the gross underrepresentation in France and Italy. That's why it's so odd for me to see Anna in the hot seat instead of Alt or Farneti, whose magazines may not have the biggest reach, but as individuals, they hold as much influence as Anna if not more at times. Alt, for instance, have direct access to Nicolas and Hedi, Farneti to Prada etc. Alt would think nothing to give 2 covers in the same calendar year to one model, and her editorial casting is often a copy and paste in terms of who we see on runways/campaigns, bar POC models of course. In her near decade long reign, she commissioned only ONE female photographer for her covers, who happens to be part of a duo with a man.
I would argue that hardcore fashion insiders, designers, creatives, the ones who cast models and photographers for campaigns and shows, the ones whose voice would matter and consult top brands across the globe don't actually respect or take cues from American Vogue. If that was the case then Tyler Mitchell would be shooting everything under the sun right now. So if you really want to reform a system then you need to get to the root, and the root of the fashion industry starts in France and Italy. The fact that they've been able to not only keep their editions running month after month but also to keep it as the standard and prestigious while all of this is happening on the other side should be questioned. There were loads of other reasons why it was time for Anna to pack it in, but diversity or the supposed lack thereof wasn't one.

I'm keen to see how the conversation of diversity will manifest in magazines going forward. I just hope it won't result in tokenisation where magazines only start appointing POC editors to style POC storylines. Fashion is a creative medium and there should be nothing wrong with Solange Franklin capturing Cali sunlight for Vogue Spain, or Nickerson evoking a black 70s couple in New York.
 
Last edited:
Uhm, Dan Sablon. I want him at VP so bad, and not only because he's black, but because I believe he'll have a different, modern perspective. Even if it's a smaller, regular placement like Miss Vogue (after they've upgraded Virginie to cover edits). Pipe dream, I know.
I think diversity would need to be more aggressively enforced in European editions than the UK/US editions because of the gross underrepresentation in France and Italy. That's why it's so odd for me to see Anna in the hot seat instead of Alt or Farneti, whose magazines may not have the biggest reach, but as individuals, they hold as much influence as Anna if not more at times. Alt, for instance, have direct access to Nicolas and Hedi, Farneti to Prada etc. Alt would think nothing to give 2 covers in the same calendar year to one model, and her editorial casting is often a copy and paste in terms of who we see on runways/campaigns, bar POC models of course. In her near decade long reign, she commissioned only ONE female photographer for her covers, who happens to be part of a duo with a man.
I would argue that hardcore fashion insiders, designers, creatives, the ones who cast models and photographers for campaigns and shows, the ones whose voice would matter and consult top brands across the globe don't actually respect or take cues from American Vogue. If that was the case then Tyler Mitchell would be shooting everything under the sun right now. So if you really want to reform a system then you need to get to the root, and the root of the fashion industry starts in France and Italy. The fact that they've been able to not only keep their editions running month after month but also to keep it as the standard and prestigious while all of this is happening on the other side should be questioned. There were loads of other reasons why it was time for Anna to pack it in, but diversity or the supposed lack thereof wasn't one.

I'm keen to see how the conversation of diversity will manifest in magazines going forward. I just hope it won't result in tokenisation where magazines only start appointing POC editors to style POC storylines. Fashion is a creative medium and there should be nothing wrong with Solange Franklin capturing Cali sunlight for Vogue Spain, or Nickerson evoking a black 70s couple in New York.

Indeed! Dan could be perfect!
Lui’s women eds are very VP in a way and he is a very fun and professional guy.

You also have Hortense Manga at Elle who is good. While Elle France is more diverse than VP, nobody can say that the identity of Elle wasn’t maintained.

The problem with Anna is maybe the fact that she hasn’t nurtured black photographers or stylists. She noticed them early enough. But that’s Vogue in a way...You need to prove himself before being able to work for US Vogue. And that, no matter if you are white or black (MAS or even Carine started to work for Vogue when they where already established and the same for Edward or Carlos).

Maybe Tyler, that you mentioned is really a photographer she nurtured by giving him space in Teen Vogue. Now, despite not being very popular, he works with JWA.

About Vogue Italia or VP, maybe the problem is simply that the audience does not care or is not enough vocal about it. The conversation won’t come from France or Italy tho. That’s the biggest issue! The conversation will come from the US!

Look at what is happening now. There à protests against racism here in France and while the crowd is multiracial, because the people behind it are from the suburbs (or the hood) brands are slightly uncomfortable to discuss it...VP post about Angela Davis or George Floyd but does not care about Adama or the different issues here. Designers on the other hand are very vocal or present. I mean Natacha and the Ghesquiere clan, Liya Kebede, Olivier Rousteing or even Jacquemus and others aren’t afraid.

There is a need for talents, for diversity but also for a more responsible audience or readers. Liya Kebede had a whole issue of VP dedicated to her in 2002. The same month, Lepen was on the final 2 to be president and the whole country « discovered » that racism was still heavily present in the country....It took Carine 7 years to feature another black girl in her pages. Readers writes and are engaged in their magazines. Sometimes they don’t buy when they see a black girl on the cover.

Italy is still very racist and people seems to forget that The Black Issue was a one off thing that had an impact internationally but the impact did not last. It took a few years for Franca to have a black girl on the cover of her magazine despite having Edward as an editor.

Anna takes the blame for the whole industry despite having featured and having in her staff more black people that you see in some fashion companies. Even the fact that she adressed a note to her black staff is quite astonishing for me...Because she is maybe the only one in the Vogue franchise (with Edward) who could do that.
 
^ The last two posts by Lola and Benn sum up exactly how I feel.

It's all well and good to start throwing stones at Anna's windows for not doing enough for black employees/creatives at US Vogue, but the factor of the matter is she has always been ahead of her peers in terms of giving POC representation either via covers, editorial apperances or in specific roles in the magazine (e.g. she picked up on Edward very quickly after he started to work at a really top level with Meisel at VI and also roped Carlos Nazario in just as he was coming to the fore). If you think back to 2007 - 2015/6 (nearly a decade!) you can see that she was more openly promoting efforts at diversity than the other American magazines (maybe Allure was an exception, but remember it was also a Conde mag).

Was the same level of tokenism as the major runway castings of the time evident? Of course! So we can't say she couldn't have done more...but in a long list of other high-profile editors who should get their hands slapped, she's way down below her peers.

And I think the fact that she has spoken up earlier than any other EIC (besides Edward) says a lot! I want to see other editors discussing this - although I guess that outside of US/UK, far too many white people still don't see it as their responsibility to discuss BLM and the issues surrounding it :rolleyes:.
 
And? Another person milking the Anna hate.

Hating and dissing on Anna is not a personality trait people.
And dismissing someone’s experiences when it comes to racial micro aggressions shouldn’t be a personality trait either.
 
And dismissing someone’s experiences when it comes to racial micro aggressions shouldn’t be a personality trait either.

How on earth is asking what one's father does a racial micro-aggression? Do you have evidence that this was only asked to her? Was this asked across the board? If these too were asked to a white applicant, is it racial micro-aggression - exactly, it's not. Stop using these terms loosely as it diminishes its impact and meaning.

These questions reek of elitism. Racial micro-aggression these are not.

Not every comment in here automatically amounts to "dismissing" something or someone. That's insanely counterproductive and disrupts healthy discourse.
 
Last edited:
These questions reek of elitism. Racial micro-aggression these are not.

Elitism and racial micro-aggresion go hand in hand. The people who where to give a 'correct' answer to those questions, in the eyes Anna, are white & upper class. Elitist environments are ones where thinly veiled white supremacy often prospers. But this also speaks to larger culture at Vogue/the industry where your last name, where you come from is more important than talent. That's why it's so difficult for minorities to break through.
 
Elitism and racial micro-aggresion go hand in hand. The people who where to give a 'correct' answer to those questions, in the eyes Anna, are white & upper class. Elitist environments are ones where thinly veiled white supremacy often prospers. But this also speaks to larger culture at Vogue/the industry where your last name, where you come from is more important than talent. That's why it's so difficult for minorities to break through.
This!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
215,293
Messages
15,295,059
Members
89,236
Latest member
ooh la la mi mi
Back
Top