• Voting for 2024 theFashionSpot Awards has now closed. Thank you for your participation. Stay tuned for the results.

The Business of Magazines

This was the best bit from that Puck article:

"In any event, the party truly vulnerable to all this tension is neither Wintour nor Enninful, but Vogue itself. At this point, Anna is the business, the individual responsible for so many of the relationships, the advertising deals, the enduring status of the brand. Without her, Vogue could one day eventually become a higher-end version of The Cut, albeit with a far more storied history."

It sums up exactly what I feel about Vogue in general. Without the celebrity power that Anna gives the magazine, it is going to sputter further into irrelevance. (And it's not even good now, as it is).

And look at what happened to Vanity Fair after Graydon left. The thing is essentially unreadable.
 
Regardless of Anna Wintour's reputation... the only Vogue worth talking about nowadays is British Vogue and I'm quite positive Wintour is aware of it also. There's no denying Edward Enninful is the future of Vogue. I'm not Enninful's #1 fan but I do applaud him!

On one hand, I was able to understand Condé Nast's need to cut costs after the global pandemic but this current strategy of sharing content has without a doubt KILLED the Vogue brand for me. The strategy has completely stripped certain editions of their own identity, with even American Vogue now a shadow of its former self - which was once the be-all end-all of Vogues.

I wouldn't like to think of the money spent on that pathetic and downright embarrassment of a Vogue World event during NYFW. The money, time and effort(?) ought to have been projected into compiling a celebratory print issue documenting 130 years. Ain't no one remembering (for the right reasons)... Vogue World. A larger-than-life anniversary issue would've reminded the world that print is here to stay!

On a more personal note, I still to this very day hold a grudge over the Vogue Paris name change and for letting Emmanuelle Alt go - and so many other brilliant editors like Eugenia de la Torriente and Mitsuko Watanabe.
 
When the print version goes, every title just shrinks down to yet another 'logo' trying to stay alive online, where even the most successful sites will have a limited lifespan. Vogue's 130 years is an achievement worth cherishing, but they seem very keen to rubbish their best assets.
 
I'm tired of this subject. Anna will only leave Vogue dead like the Queen of England. What I really wanted was a good editor in charge of Bazaar US as they were until the 60's, when Bazaar was more important than Vogue, so maybe CN wakes up and decides to stop this global thing.
 
All this successor talk…. when the future of Vogue itself is doubtful.

The job description for a Vogue editor 10 years ago is no longer the same as it is today. The most important qualification now is if said person can usher the brand to the digital fora. We all know its coming.
 
Not that it matters what I (or we) think, but since Amy Astley was mentioned, I feel the need to chime in. I am really hoping she gets the job, unlikely though it may be at this point. And not just because I think she's just a lovely, kind person in a sea of fashion-world and publishing-world cattiness, but because I think she's best equipped for the job of overseeing an increasingly digital brand. I've always loved Architectural Digest since I was a kid, but in just a few years she transformed it from a title with a somewhat stodgy reputation into a digital powerhouse, able to to still attract the actual best in terms of architects and designers to the print publication (which remains thicker and more regularly released than it's American counterparts of Elle Decor, House Beautiful, etc.) while pumping out the celebrity-driven content that does big numbers online. I'm constantly impressed by their digital output but I read every print issue cover to cover as well. She just nails it when it comes to the crossroads of elite sophistication, escapist fantasy, and broad commercial appeal. And you never get the sense that she's just in it to promote herself, flaunt her connections, or to exploit her position in order to provide opportunities to her friends.
 
Not that it matters what I (or we) think, but since Amy Astley was mentioned, I feel the need to chime in. I am really hoping she gets the job, unlikely though it may be at this point. And not just because I think she's just a lovely, kind person in a sea of fashion-world and publishing-world cattiness, but because I think she's best equipped for the job of overseeing an increasingly digital brand. I've always loved Architectural Digest since I was a kid, but in just a few years she transformed it from a title with a somewhat stodgy reputation into a digital powerhouse, able to to still attract the actual best in terms of architects and designers to the print publication (which remains thicker and more regularly released than it's American counterparts of Elle Decor, House Beautiful, etc.) while pumping out the celebrity-driven content that does big numbers online. I'm constantly impressed by their digital output but I read every print issue cover to cover as well. She just nails it when it comes to the crossroads of elite sophistication, escapist fantasy, and broad commercial appeal. And you never get the sense that she's just in it to promote herself, flaunt her connections, or to exploit her position in order to provide opportunities to her friends.
Agree 100%. AD remains a bright spot in a sea of mediocrity when it comes to the Conde/Hearst world. But I also speculate they'd keep her there at AD, and would want someone of color to replace Anna (not making a judgment call on whether that is good or bad, just that it is what they feel is the "right" move).
 
Anyone dying to jump onto a sinking ship can't possibly be the brightest of talents out there. So my expectations of the next editor are not very high. Edward seems like the most obvious approach because every other editor with actual talent has moved on already. He has jumped to the front of the line by outwaiting everyone else not by being the most talented.
 
The very good thing about Edward is he still cares about fashion, even if he put all those celebs. He keeps calling models for the covers, legends and new girls, he has a political statement, but at the same time don't avoid glamour to spread the message, because he understand and respect what is the Vogue brand. He took the best from great editors as Grace and Franca. Of course he isn't huge as both, because he still quite young, but I agree his Vogue is superior than the American edition. I only dislike his influence on VF and VI, it's too obvious sometimes.

In another note, CD is not only destroying Vogue. Worldwide GQ is also a huge disaster, and most of the covers (not only the contents inside as Vogue) are shared.
 
The Daily Mail's take on the situation (dailymail.co.uk)

Just in case you miss the interesting part, I'll repeat it here:

At the centre of it all is Enninful himself, who is driving the most radical and controversial changes in the magazine’s 130-year-old history: an audacious bid to make Vogue more diverse and even ‘genderless’ – a departure from its traditional female base.

The latest decision to raise stylishly bushy eyebrows was the inclusion of Oscar-nominated actor Timothée Chalamet on the latest cover, making him British Vogue’s first male cover star. Enninful is said to be ‘keen’ to land Ncuti Gatwa, the first black Doctor in Doctor Who and star of Netflix’s Sex Education, as his next cover star.

‘He wants to appeal to everyone, not just women,’ a source confided to The Mail on Sunday. ‘To him, the future is a genderless, multicultural Vogue that appeals to everyone and excludes no one. Gay men have always bought the magazine but he wants to attract everyone and reach out to an audience who would not traditionally buy a women’s fashion magazine.’

What that means for those faithful to Vogue’s female-led brand of high fashion remains to be seen. As one observer put it: ‘At its heart, Vogue represents glamour and aspiration for women. If you stop it being a women’s magazine, you destroy its soul.’


Will the King of woke kill off the Queen of fashion? He wants to make Vogue ‘genderless’. She wants it to remain the style bible for women. As the battle hots up, will Edward Enninful manage to topple Anna Wintour?
  • Enninful is driving to make Vogue ‘genderless’ a departure from its female base
  • His latest decision was the inclusion of Timothée Chalamet on the latest cover
  • ‘He wants to appeal to everyone, not just women,’ a source explained
  • Speculation that Enninful is lined up to take over Editor-in-chief of Conde Nast
By CHARLOTTE GRIFFITHS IN LONDON and CAROLINE GRAHAM IN LOS ANGELES FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY

PUBLISHED: 22:36, 1 October 2022 | UPDATED: 08:35, 3 October 2022

The rare smile that flashed across the face of legendary American Vogue Editor-in-Chief Anna Wintour at Victoria Beckham’s Paris fashion show on Friday was too remarkable to go unnoticed. That it was directed at the man who sat just a few seats away, British Vogue’s Editor-in-Chief Edward Enninful, was even more intriguing.

For while Ms Wintour must have hoped that the gesture would convey a sense of unity, behind the glossy pages of the fashion bible is a growing froideur between the magazine’s grand dame and her former protégé, the first black and openly gay man to get the top job.

Indeed, playing out in the shadows is what one magazine insider has described as ‘a fight not only for the crown of Vogue but for the very heart and soul of the magazine itself’.

Enninful is driving the most radical and controversial changes in the magazine’s 130-year-old history: an audacious bid to make Vogue more diverse and even ‘genderless’ – a departure from its traditional female base

At the centre of it all is Enninful himself, who is driving the most radical and controversial changes in the magazine’s 130-year-old history: an audacious bid to make Vogue more diverse and even ‘genderless’ – a departure from its traditional female base.

The latest decision to raise stylishly bushy eyebrows was the inclusion of Oscar-nominated actor Timothée Chalamet on the latest cover, making him British Vogue’s first male cover star. Enninful is said to be ‘keen’ to land Ncuti Gatwa, the first black Doctor in Doctor Who and star of Netflix’s Sex Education, as his next cover star.

‘He wants to appeal to everyone, not just women,’ a source confided to The Mail on Sunday. ‘To him, the future is a genderless, multicultural Vogue that appeals to everyone and excludes no one. Gay men have always bought the magazine but he wants to attract everyone and reach out to an audience who would not traditionally buy a women’s fashion magazine.’

What that means for those faithful to Vogue’s female-led brand of high fashion remains to be seen. As one observer put it: ‘At its heart, Vogue represents glamour and aspiration for women. If you stop it being a women’s magazine, you destroy its soul.’

But at the moment, it seems there is little that can slow Enninful. Since the 50-year-old, who arrived in the UK from Ghana aged 13, took over the helm of British Vogue five years ago, there has been constant speculation that he is being lined up to take over Wintour’s job as Editor-in-chief of American Vogue and Global Chief Content Officer of the magazine’s publisher, Conde Nast.

Since the 50-year-old, who arrived in the UK from Ghana aged 13, took over the helm of British Vogue five years ago, there has been constant speculation that he is being lined up to take over Wintour’s job as Editor-in-chief of American Vogue and Global Chief Content Officer of the magazine’s publisher, Conde Nast

A source said: ‘There have been plenty of pretenders to the throne but Edward considers himself her natural successor and he is the only person who appears to be a real threat.’

Yet even in the famously waspish world of fashion he has been branded a ‘diva’, and has earned himself the deliciously catty soubriquet ‘Edward Enninfulofhimself’.

Also bitchily referred to as the ‘Queen Mother’, he is said to have much in common with his mentor. One US outlet has alleged he has ‘assistants [who] lead him around through meetings and carry his glasses and eye drops and help apply them’.

His admirers say that no one ever calls him the ‘Queen Mother’ and that he needs eyedrops because his eyesight is so bad it borders on being a disability.

Reports also suggest he waves off colleagues with simple requests by asking them to ‘call Darnell’ [his powerful agent, Darnell Strom].

And his differences with the formidable Wintour – whose famously demanding personality has earned her the nickname ‘Nuclear Wintour’ – suggest he is made of stern stuff.

In the US, reports of the growing rift between the magazine empire’s two most influential editors burst into the open this week with several outlets seemingly ‘briefed’ about the simmering tensions.

‘Anna Wintour’s Feud With Her Protege Is Turning Conde Nasty’ read one headline in an article which alleged that Enninful is ‘apparently gunning for the Iron Lady of Gloss’s plum job’ and has told associates he ‘believes he can do a better job than Wintour atop the Vogue brand’.

The publication speculated Wintour may try to ‘appease’ Enninful, who has spent recent weeks on a book tour promoting his memoir, A Visible Man, by manoeuvering him into another coveted position, perhaps the editorship of an alternative magazine in the Conde Nast stable, to protect her own job. ‘Anna is no fool, so people expect there to be musical chairs soon,’ said one source.

The latest decision to raise stylishly bushy eyebrows was the inclusion of Oscar-nominated actor Timothée Chalamet on the latest cover, making him British Vogue’s first male cover star

Tongues were wagging last month when Enninful was absent from a glamorous ‘Vogue World’ event in New York hosted by Wintour to showcase her vision for the magazine’s future.

A source said: ‘He’d been all over New York promoting his memoir so the expectation was he’d be there. The fact he was on annual leave and flying to California at the time has been a source of constant chatter.’

The pair also kept their distance in Paris this week despite the choreographed smiles at Posh’s fashion show. Enninful holed up at the Crillon hotel with his friend, Tatler Editor Richard Dennen, while Wintour took her favourite suite at the Ritz.

Meanwhile, just as intriguing, are signs that Wintour appears to have been taking a leaf out of Enninful’s book in a bid to stay with the times.

When he took over as British Vogue’s editor in 2017, it marked a radical departure from the magazine’s previous editor, the highly respected Alexandra Shulman, who’d held the post for 25 years.

Enninful was heard describing the office as having ‘too many old white posh women’. Several senior female executives were immediately replaced by men and women of colour, and with them a number of ‘young, cool and gay hipsters’. One of them is his protege Alex Kessler, a fashion editor who lists his pronouns as he/him.

Not to be outdone, Wintour was prompted to look at her own empire which had been criticised for being ‘white-centric’. Certainly since then she has sought to promote diversity and once famously looked around an editorial meeting and declared: ‘Why are there so many white people in the room?’

But if Wintour views Enninful as a threat, her supporters are not admitting it. Last night one said: ‘Everyone is making a big deal about Edward putting Timothée on the cover, but Anna put Harry Styles on the cover of American Vogue two years ago.

‘Anna is tough. She’s survived three decades at the very top of her game. She’s like the Queen, she will die in that job. She’ll never willingly hand it over.

‘Anna has been always very firm in her view of what Vogue should be; a fashion bible for women.’

But, it seems, Enninful is a man with a mission. He has also been on a major charm offensive in the States as he promotes his book.

In a profile in the New York Times, he spoke about his lifelong battle against racism, telling the now infamous story about how a white security guard at Vogue’s London HQ turned him away from the front door and told him to use the tradesman’s entrance.

Although the guard was fired, Enninful used the anecdote to illustrate the daily racism that he encounters, including having to ask a white staff member to hail cabs for him.

The piece gushingly described Enninful as ‘at the vanguard of a new cohort’ who ‘yanked open the fusty chintz curtains and displayed an aurora borealis of different races, sizes, ages and sexualities’.

He also quietly showed off his star power by handing the author of the New York Times piece a list of friends to contact which started with: ‘Beyoncé. Rihanna. Naomi. Iman. Oprah.’

A well-placed source predicts Enninful will remain undeterred in pursuit of his goals. ‘In public, he and Anna show nothing but respect for each other but there seems no doubt that he is gunning for her crown,’ the source said.

‘She may have tried to move with the times, and kudos to her for trying, but she cannot change the fact she is an old white woman.’

His value has been recognised within the company. Enninful now holds the title of European Editorial Director of Vogue as well as Editor-in-Chief of British Vogue, giving him control of influential Vogue editions in Italy, France and Spain. And, whatever he is doing, it’s working.

While British Vogue’s readership is small (around eight million between print and digital compared with American Vogue’s 25million, according to Conde Nast), British Vogue’s subscriptions rose more than 14 per cent in 2021 compared with the previous year.

As Enninful told the New York Times: ‘You can still have diversity and keep the quality up,’ pointing to covers featuring Rihanna and Beyoncé and a special issue guest-edited by the Duchess of Sussex.

He has also gained powerful allies including Conde Nast publisher Si Newhouse’s wife Ronnie, who has known him since the 1990s when she was the creative director for Calvin Klein and he was the stylist for Kate Moss’s jeans campaign. Richard Dennen, clearly influenced by his colleague, now ensures every other Tatler cover features a person of colour.

As for Enninful, in public at least, he remains diplomatic. When asked by the New York Times if he ‘had ambitions to run the Vogue mothership’, he responded: ‘I’m happy working in Europe.

‘But you never know what the future holds.’
 
Yeah sure, let's talk about the delayed pride cover. Oh wait, are we supposed to forget about that because Edward, nevertheless, gave us a 'Yass-ified' Mother Queen Bee?

Pieces like this that unnecessarily glorify Edward as the champion of inclusivity really grinds my gears.

The bar is literally so low.
 
I don’t know how true that is so I don’t want to rush to throw Edward under the bus given the source of this gossip, but I’m beyond uninterested in a “genderless” Vogue. I think it’s so interesting how often the push to erase gender distinctions for the general populous benefits men in favor of women.



I understand some people do not want to be gendered but that’s a small minority and there are already numerous magazines that aren’t gender-specific
 
Last edited:
One comment under the article said "Genderless and readerless".

Theoretically, how would it work? Would the fashion editorials attempt to focus on women but also on men? Separate or blended? Would readers from one area be interested in content for the other? Would half the issue be irrelevant to the other half of the audience? I know there's a middle ground, but it may not account for as many people as Vogue's advertisers would like to see.

With a move away from women, would Vogue resemble a general entertainment magazine more than a fashion one?

Part of me also wonders about any man at the helm of a woman's magazine, especially as he grows older, and becomes a 50-to-60-year-old man trying to relate and create content for teenage girls and upwards. A woman editor may be in her 60s, but throughout her life, she has accumulated the lived experience to directly relate to a female readership at different stages in their lives. But if you make your magazine genderless, then this doesn't matter, it's not needed.

I suppose if you make your magazine PAPERless, then none of this matters at all, because people will click on the content that's relevant to them, instead of buying a print product that's trying to please everyone (and no-one) at the same time.
 
Part of me also wonders about any man at the helm of a woman's magazine, especially as he grows older, and becomes a 50-to-60-year-old man trying to relate and create content for teenage girls and upwards. A woman editor may be in her 60s, but throughout her life, she has accumulated the lived experience to directly relate to a female readership at different stages in their lives. But if you make your magazine genderless, then this doesn't matter, it's not needed.
This has always been my contention when it came to men editing women's magazines. Not fashion magazines, women's magazines...which British Vogue and Vogue Singapore fall under. There will always be that blind spot, you don't even have to wait until they reach 60 years of age. And male editors surrounding themselves with a strong female team only means women end up doing the core conceptual work and create an avatar for the magazine as opposed to the actual editor. Most men working at any level at a women's magazine know this.

So the only demographic who 'would not traditionally buy a women's magazine' imo would be buying straight men. The same group who doesn't rate any platform where they're not centered. Why would they buy Vogue when they're not even buying GQ or Vogue Hommes?

Pipe dream.
 
Why would they buy Vogue when they're not even buying GQ or Vogue Hommes?

My very thought exactly. It's silly to try to make magazines genderless, when you're a man or a woman you're not interested, at least for me, to see what the other gender is wearing and obviously the age difference of readers is a big problem as well. Fashion magazines aimed at 16 year-olds and whose contents are showing makeup and dresses don't interest straight male readers in their 30's or even in the same age group. Come on!
 
Magazines being 'genderless' will only work when your magazine fully shifts to the digital platform. If at all, this caters to the social media demographic and not the actual readers of the magazine.

At its core, magazine readers - those who actually buy physical copies - still want to read stories/articles/features that they can relate to.

Or does 'genderless' mean having an inclusive set of cover stars + editorial features. To an extent, that is possible. BUT that merely touches 10% of the actual magazine. How can you actually achieve a genderless magazine when all your runway features are still for Women's collections? When all your editorials still use the women's collections? When the ad campaign inside the magazine are still clad with female models advertising the women's collections of the brands? When your features are still about women? When your articles are still about issues that concern women?

Vogue is a women's magazine. You cannot turn it into a 'genderless' magazine without losing its identity.

This is what happens when pandering becomes priority.
 
Last edited:
How hard can it be to produce and publish a separate mens supplement like L'uomo? Unless they're planning to convert into a quarterly brick of a magazine like AnOther or Dazed, this genderless shtick is a no go.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
212,731
Messages
15,197,551
Members
86,725
Latest member
citynoise
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->