- Joined
- Jul 14, 2017
- Messages
- 14,563
- Reaction score
- 20,824
I think this is who will represent the Vogue Paris team:
https://instagram.com/eugenietrochu?utm_medium=copy_link
Well, she does seem to have a certain appreciation for denim...
I think this is who will represent the Vogue Paris team:
https://instagram.com/eugenietrochu?utm_medium=copy_link
maybe the magazine is closingFarrah Storr has announced her departure from British Elle:
maybe the magazine is closing
Vogue will continue to go downwards.It’s Anna Wintour’s world now
Condé Nast has scythed staff numbers and brought dozens of its magazines under the irrepressible Vogue editor’s direct control. But at what cost?
September 3, 2021 By Jo Ellison
People were already lamenting the golden age of magazines when I arrived at Vogue in February 2008. Budgets faced more scrutiny and there was a popular rumour that “town car” use and floristry expenditure were being carefully surveyed.
But, despite the tumult on the financial markets, the publishers remained bullishly optimistic about Condé Nast’s future: just as readers reached for Vogue through two world wars and previous recessions, they were assured, so it would transpire the title would prove impregnable again. Advertising was buoyant.
There was a vague discussion that perhaps Condé should think about digital subscriptions but, went the counterargument, Vogue was primarily a visual medium and no reader would pay to look at pictures on a screen. Meanwhile, the online arm of the magazine was treated like a bastard child, expected to deliver clickbait content that would resonate with readers of the Daily Mail.
Meanwhile, the mythology of Vogue continued, abetted by a blockbuster documentary, The September Issue, and, ironically, the internet, which with its obsession with new influencers found each title nurturing cult personalities of their own — the rangy Emmanuelle Alt of Vogue Paris, Vogue China’s Angelica Cheung, with her sharp bob and gigantic social media profile, Germany’s soigné minimalist, the radiant Christiane Arp.
There were then some two dozen Vogue titles, with new editions appearing every year. They were fiercely competitive, displaying a tribal rivalry whereby each magazine cultivated an editorial identity so as to distinguish it from the mother ship — Anna Wintour’s US Vogue.
Not that the casual reader really seemed to notice. In the seven years I worked at British Vogue, under Alexandra Shulman, most people only ever asked what it was like to have Anna as a boss.
Everyone works for Wintour now. Well, at least, anybody at Condé Nast, where the 71-year-old has been worldwide chief content officer since the end of 2020, and where, following a long period of consultancy and the need for the US division to recoup some $100m in annual losses, the regional titles have been consolidated into groups. In a massive “hubbing” of titles, staff numbers have been scythed and the regional editions recalibrated so that, with the exception of a little “local content”, the magazines now largely look the same.
GQ is now run out of America. House & Garden and Traveller have undergone a similar homogeny. Vogue now boasts three senior editorial directors, among them Britain’s Edward Enninful, who now looks after Europe, and Leslie Sun, who is overseeing Asia, while most others have been retired. Anna Wintour is the top dog: with final say over publications in more than 30 markets around the world and control of all the Vogue editions. The New Yorker, which has surpassed Vogue as Condé Nast’s biggest contributor to US profits, is one of the few titles that have been shielded from her all-powerful eye.
To see Condé Nast forced to make swingeing cuts might give its competitors cause for celebration — I do, after all, edit How to Spend It, a luxury magazine — were it not for the fact that most monthly publications, at most publishing houses, are largely going through the same. Condé Nast’s cuts are especially high profile, but while the media has delighted in all the gossip, it’s a tragedy for the industry at large.
For decades, Condé Nast has nurtured generations of creatives whose work has fed our cultural lives: narrowing the talent pool content neuters opportunity. There will be less experimentation, magazines will be even more susceptible to advertiser brands. Designers will see their clothes shot in one story rather than a dozen.
The hub sheds Condé of a system that is costly and old-fashioned, and allows the company to shift its focus to sexier, more lucrative partnerships in television, live events and film. In the meantime, stylists, photographers, hair stylists, editors, publicists and art directors will compete for fewer jobs. Mass storytelling will lead to fewer shoots, fewer stories and fewer ideas in circulation. Young creatives will have to find new outlets to make their voices heard.
As Condé’s ultimate commander, Wintour has now assumed a demigod status as the arbiter of style. But her power is exercised on a stage that grows ever smaller. And notwithstanding her mighty influence, I can’t imagine many people under 40 still seeking out her point of view. The biggest influencers today are on Instagram or TikTok, a platform on which Vogue still has comparatively few followers and has yet to grab a decent share.
The first hubbed issue of Vogue since the announcement is called “New Beginnings”. It’s a blueprint of editorial efficiency; powerfully inoffensive, collaborative (I counted no less than four fashion stylists attributed to one story), optimised for digital (you can see the picture moving) and strangely anodyne.
This week, for the first time since the pandemic, sees the resumption of the fashion shows in earnest. Fashion’s front row thrones will once again be occupied, but it will be more conspicuous for the chairs that are not filled. The Condé world has always been colourful, flamboyant, ridiculous and, sometimes, caustic. The new Vogue may be global, but it lacks some magic without its local tribes.
source | ft
For decades, Condé Nast has nurtured generations of creatives whose work has fed our cultural lives: narrowing the talent pool content neuters opportunity. There will be less experimentation, magazines will be even more susceptible to advertiser brands. Designers will see their clothes shot in one story rather than a dozen.
source | ft