The Business of Magazines

[axiomatic]

GQ editor Jim Nelson is out after 15 years at the top
By Alexandra Steigrad
4 minutes
September 13, 2018 | 3:30pm | Updated September 13, 2018 | 4:11pm

Jim Nelson, the editor-in-chief of GQ, is leaving the magazine he helmed since 2003, The Post has learned.

Nelson’s exit, confirmed in a memo obtained by The Post, marks yet another big name editorial departure at Condé Nast, as the publisher continues to cut staff and costs, including fat salaries left over from the glory days of magazine publishing.

“Now feels like a good time for me to figure out the next chapter of my life. (It’ll be a good one, I promise),” Nelson said in the memo.

Nelson, who joined GQ as a senior editor in 1997, has been responsible for some of the men’s magazine’s biggest coups, including 64 National Magazine Award nominations and wins in categories from photography and design to general excellence and reporting.

He will be replaced by Will Welch, the 37-year-old editor in chief of GQ Style, the high-end quarterly edition of GQ.

“Will is the definition of a modern editor,” said Bob Sauerberg, CEO and president, Condé Nast. “He has a real command of how to create distinct and powerful content for every platform and understands the importance of inclusivity and authenticity in a brand’s voice today.”

Vogue editor-in-chief Anna Wintour, who also serves as Condé’s artistic director said, “Will is responsible for so much of what has propelled GQ forward and has a clear vision for where it will go in the future… His knowledge and keen eye for fashion and design and how to present it in a democratic way is a big part of his success with the reader.”

Last September, Graydon Carter left Vanity Fair after a 25-year run as editor-in-chief, followed by Cindi Leive, Glamour’s editor of 16 years.

Earlier this year, there were rumors that fashion’s most famous editor, Wintour, who also serves as the company’s artistic director would be retiring. Those rumors have been vehemently denied by the publisher and Wintour herself.

Instead, the company continues to focus on building its digital and video business and sell off underperforming glossies. Last month, Condé said it was selling its smaller titles, Brides, W and Golf Digest.

There have also been reports that Glamour, once the publishing house’s cash cow, is thinking of closing print. Another, and perhaps more likely scenario, would be slowly reducing the magazine’s frequency, sources said. There has also been buzz that Glamour is being informally shopped.

But all of those rumors have been shot down by Condé as just that, “rumors.” And at Condé Nast, which is still by most accounts the buzziest magazine publisher around, there is no shortage of rumors— just print jobs.

Nelson, whose name been bandied about as the next big editorial departure for the last two years, offered a heartfelt goodbye to staffers Thursday.

“I’ve been at GQ for 21 years and in this job for more than 15 — a good, long, productive run, not to mention a ton of fun — and I’ve gotten to work with some of the most talented writers, editors, photographers, designers, and creative minds in the business,” Nelson wrote in the Thursday memo. “And with Will Welch taking over in the new year, I know that GQ will be in great hands.”

https://nypost.com/2018/09/13/gq-editor-jim-nelson-is-out-after-15-years-at-the-top/

 

[Benn98]

Wow, another one bites the dust!
The mass exodus of pre-digital editors continues......

 

[MissMagAddict]

source | fwd | mydigitalcopy

 

[MissMagAddict]

Inside the Revolution at Condé Nast International
Sept. 14, 2018

By Elizabeth Paton

LONDON — This summer, when Condé Nast announced it was merging the United States and international versions of its magazine Condé Nast Traveler onto a new single platform, and that it would be overseen not from its birthplace in New York, but from London, fashion and media heads were turned on both sides of the Atlantic.

After all, the world of the United States publisher and its flagships Vogue, Vanity Fair and GQ had always remained resolutely aloof from its international versions. What could the Traveler decision portend?

As the September catwalk shows got underway, observers learned the answer. From now on, fashion week coverage production from Vogue — the jewel in the company crown — will also be centralized in London and based in the grand new headquarters of Condé Nast International, the arm of the publisher responsible for business outside America and led by the chairman and chief executive, Jonathan Newhouse.

From British Vogue, Vogue Paris and Vogue Japan, to Runway, the online fashion show and review hub from American Vogue, everything from photo production to backstage videos, social media posts and some features around fashion shows will largely be handled by Vogue International, an editorial hub inaugurated last year to create coordinated digital content for the 25 editions of the magazine that now operate worldwide.

Vogue International content will not feature in any Vogue print editions, and this week a C.N.I. spokeswoman said that the high-profile Vogue magazine critics and features staff members who line the front rows will remain based on their home turf and produce reviews and trend reports. But the recent consolidation of firepower in the British capital, coupled with Condé Nast International’s increasingly ambitious investment effort to expand into new regions, has spurred fresh speculation around the internal struggles afoot within the publisher’s boardrooms and editorial offices across the globe.


And the man behind many of the changes, Wolfgang Blau, president of Condé Nast International, has kept a relatively low profile when it comes to his magazine-mind. Until now.

“We are in a state of transformation,” he said last month from a minimalist glass office with expansive views across the skyline and the Thames River. “After years of operating with many highly autonomous magazine businesses all over the world — an approach that historically worked very well — C.N.I. is moving our titles toward a new way of thinking.”

A former technology reporter in San Francisco, editor in chief of the website for the German weekly newspaper Zeit, and director of digital strategy at the British newspaper The Guardian (before being passed over for the job of editor), Mr. Blau, 50, joined Condé Nast International as chief digital officer in 2015, tasked with bolstering digital growth. Charming and articulate but also somewhat clinical, with a vocal presence on social media and an obsession with China, he soon made waves.

“As we worked together, I realized Wolfgang possessed a unique constellation of talents as well as a rare leadership ability,” noted Mr. Newhouse, from his office, which backs onto that of his number two. In 2017, he promoted Mr. Blau to president of the company, with the goal of moving the international company from a federation of market-based operations with over 60 autonomous websites to a more fluid organization with headquarters in London, as well as plotting new growth strategies to ensure the company survived the next wave of technological upheaval.

At a time when many media groups have been shuttering foreign titles and downsizing bureaus (including Condé Nast, the American sister company of Condé Nast International, where morale is low after a reported $120 million worth of losses last year and where titles like Brides, Golf Digest and W have been put up for sale), Mr. Blau has done the opposite.

“Truly global publishing with a personal touch has to extend beyond just the Anglosphere,” he said. In the last 18 months, the international company — which has been “highly profitable” since 1995, Mr. Blau said, and will continue to be so in 2018 — has introduced Vogue Arabia, Vogue Poland and Vogue Czech Republic and Slovakia; plans for a Vogue Greece were unveiled last week, and there are more in the pipeline. International rollouts of new GQs are also expected.

America is not part of Mr. Blau’s remit, he stressed. (Condé Nast and Condé Nast International are separate sister companies. Their parent group, Advance Publications, is privately owned and controlled by the billionaire Newhouse family.) But conversations were had “daily” with his New York counterparts on how each side could help the other to grow their businesses. For him that means Condé Nast International, which operates in 29 markets on six continents, would no longer be structured around countries. Instead, it would be built around brands. Starting with Vogue.

“That whole end-of-print narrative, which I have sung myself in different circumstances, doesn’t hold the same weight with a highly visual title like Vogue as it does with, say, newspapers,” Mr. Blau said, noting that in some countries like China and India, Vogue print revenue was actually increasing.

“I have always been wary of succumbing to the power of a brand gospel,” he said. “But we are the biggest single network of fashion experts on the planet, and are only just beginning to realize that about ourselves.”

The plan behind Vogue International and fashion weeks, he said, was to take on in London the type of content production, social media promotion and news stories that were previously being done “in 15 Vogue offices in 15 cities at the same time.” With centralized commissioning and the streamlining of image processing, it could then scale capacity to cover more international fashion shows in places such as Colombia and Mexico. Two-hundred editorial and engineering staff members have been hired, and next year, he wants to have a Vogue presence at about 900 runway shows.

Not surprisingly, in the famously hierarchical and protective world of fashion magazines this has created some unease.

“Look, there is no model for what we have been trying to do,” Mr. Blau said. “When you tell an editor in Japan or Russia that you are creating a central editorial team, unsurprisingly a lot assume: ‘My God, they want to take my territory and really think they can produce from another continent what we produce.’ It has been hard, and it has taken time to build their trust. But we are making great progress now.”


The last 18 months, however, have seen both setbacks, most notably the high-profile closing last year of the e-commerce venture Style.com, in which C.N.I. had invested $100 million, and a stark changing of the guard. That much of this has taken place in the wake of the October death of Si Newhouse, the former Condé Nast chairman, prompting a redistribution of his responsibilities within a complicated cross-border family network at the company — with other senior executives also in the mix — added an additional layer of intrigue.

“We had to make a lot of changes, including replacing most of the country presidents and many editors,” Jonathan Newhouse said of the turnover. “But that has brought us exciting talents, like Edward Enninful editing British Vogue.”

Married with two children, Mr. Blau said that the last few years he had been traveling relentlessly, spending much of his time in India and the Far East, especially China, which Mr. Blau sees as a digital frontier unto itself (indeed, he often refers to “the era of two internets,” America and China.)

Vogue China now has 21 digital editors — seven of whom are exclusively focused on creating content for WeChat, the platform on which Condé Nast now makes the vast majority of its digital revenue in China.

“Local teams will always know local readers, so features, interviews and even reviews should be produced locally as much as possible. But anything one step removed from that is a different story,” he said.

“To survive as a media group you either need to be a paper of record or own a global niche. The latter is what we are and need to continue to be. We spent a long time extremely decentralized as a company. Now let’s just say we are currently in a phase of extreme centralization.”

source | nytimes

 

[axiomatic]

This times a million..., from NYT

"R.I.P., the Celebrity Profile"

All glossy magazine superstar covers may look the same from a distance, but inside, you’re never quite sure what you’ll find.

Take the October issue of GQ, which features Paul McCartney. For decades he has leaned on familiar Beatles anecdotes, presuming that decades-old chestnuts may still pass for warm. But in GQ, over the course of several long conversations, he revealed himself to be unstudied, slightly wishy-washy and much less preoccupied with the sanctity of his own image than you might think — he even offered a recollection about the Beatles’ teenage sexual adventures that led to a characteristically sweaty New York Post headline: “Beat the Meatles.”

The story worked in two ways: For the reader and fan, it was appealingly revealing; for Mr. McCartney, who’s been famous so long he is more sculpture than human, it was a welcome softening.

This took a willingness to answer questions, to submit to the give and take that comes with a profile of that scale. But not all big stories demand such transparency of their subjects: say, the September issue of Vogue with Beyoncé on the cover. The accompanying article is titled “Beyoncé in Her Own Words” — not a profile, but a collection of brief, only-occasionally-revealing commentaries on a range of topics: motherhood and family, body acceptance, touring. Anna Wintour refers to the story in her editor’s letter as a “powerful essay” that “Beyoncé herself writes,” as if that were an asset, not a liability. There was a journalist in the room at some point in the process — the piece has an “as told to” credit at the end — but outside perspectives have effectively been erased.

For devotees of Beyoncé, this might not matter (though it should). But for devotees of celebrity journalism — the kind of work that aims to add context and depth to the fame economy, and which is predicated on the productive frisson between an interviewer and interviewee — this portends catastrophe. And it’s not an isolated event. In pop music especially, plenty of the most famous performers essentially eschew the press: Taylor Swift hasn’t given a substantive interview and access to a print publication for at least two years. For Drake, it’s been about a year (and a tumultuous one at that). Frank Ocean has all but disappeared (again).

What’s replaced it isn’t satisfying: either outright silence, or more often, unidirectional narratives offered through social media. Monologue, not dialogue. It threatens to upend the role of the celebrity press.

Since the 1960s, in-depth interviews have been a crucial part of the star-making process, but also a regular feature of high-level celebrity maintenance — artists didn’t abandon their obligations to the media just because they had reached the pinnacle of fame. Answering questions was part of the job. It was the way that the people making the most interesting culture explained themselves, whether it was John Lennon on the breakup of the Beatles, Tupac Shakur speaking out from jail, or Courtney Love in the wake of Kurt Cobain’s death. It was illuminating to fans, but also something of a badge of honor for the famous, especially when the conversations were adversarial. Stars like Ice Cube and Madonna used to thrive in those circumstances — the interviews revealed them to be thoughtful, unafraid of being challenged and alive to the creation of their image.

But that was in a climate in which print publications had a disproportionate amount of leverage, and the internet and TMZ hadn’t wrested away narrative control. When stars’ comings and goings began to be documented on a minute-by-minute basis, those changes triggered celebrity reticence. On its own, that wouldn’t signal the death knell of celebrity journalism as it’s been practiced for decades. But the pressure being applied to celebrity journalism from the top might pale in comparison to the threat surging from below, where a new generation of celebrities — YouTube stars, SoundCloud rappers, and various other earnest young people — share extensively on social media on their own terms, moving quickly and decisively (and messily) with no need for the patience and pushback they might encounter in an interview setting.

This generation is one of all-access hyperdocumentation, making the promise of celebrity journalism — emphasizing intimate perspective and behind-the-scenes access — largely irrelevant.

An emblematic example is the rapper Lil Xan, who in recent months has played out several microdramas online: discussing his health struggles and how they put him at odds with his management (his phone was forcibly grabbed from his hand while he was live on Instagram discussing family drama); falling for and then breaking up with Noah Cyrus, Miley’s younger sister. Traditional media might catch up to his story someday, but he’s not waiting to be asked for a comment before providing one. (He recently announced on Instagram that he was filming a series for Netflix, again bypassing old platforms.)

Sometimes, social media posts take the place of what was once the preserve of the tell-all interview: Ariana Grande mourned her ex-boyfriend, Mac Miller, in an Instagram post; the rapper XXXTentacion replied to allegations of sexual assault on his Instagram Story; the YouTube star Logan Paul used his usual platform to apologize for a video in which he filmed a dead body.

These are one-sided stories, with no scrutiny beyond the comments section. And so they’ve be come highly visible safe spaces for young celebrities, especially in an era when one’s direct social media audience — via Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat and more — can far exceed the reach of even the most prestigious or popular publication, and in a way that’s laser-targeted to supporters.

All of which leaves celebrity journalism in a likely unsolvable conundrum. The most famous have effectively dispensed with it, and the newly famous have grown up in an age where it was largely irrelevant. Over time, the middle space may well be squeezed into nothingness.


What’s more, creation of content has been diversified — for the casual consumer, it can be difficult to tell the difference between original reporting and aggregation, content created by journalistic outlets and content created by brands. This blurriness incentivizes the famous away from traditional media, where they don’t control the final product.

And as old-media extinction looms, the new ecosystem is often used as a corrective — or loud distraction. Selena Gomez is on the cover of Elle this month, and the accompanying story is relatively innocuous. But when it appeared online, she replied with a long Instagram post expressing frustration. “Speaking from my heart for over an hour to someone who puts those thoughts into paid words can be hard for me,” she wrote. “The older I get the more I want my voice to be mine.” She then listed the specific things she sought to promote in the interview, and lamented that other things — namely, her personal life, and her church — were given too much attention.

And so as the power dynamic tilts in favor of the famous over the press, publications — weakened, desperate, financially fragile — have been forced to find ever more contorted ways to trade, at minimum, the feeling of control in exchange for precious access.

Celebrities guest edit — “edit” — special issues of magazines. And while Ms. Swift did appear on the cover of Harper’s Bazaar this year, in the accompanying article, she is the interviewer, asking questions of the rock muse Pattie Boyd. In 2015, Rihanna photographed herself for the cover of The Fader. (The shoot was executed in concert with a professional photographer.) It was, yes, a metacommentary on panoptic fame, and also the cover star taking her own photograph.

If those options aren’t available, magazines can simply assign a friend of the celebrity to conduct the interview. In Elle, Jennifer Lawrence interviewed Emma Stone. Blake Lively conducted Gigi Hadid’s Harper’s Bazaar May cover interview. Katy Perry’s March Glamour cover interview was by the Instagram affirmation specialist Cleo Wade. Interview, a magazine predicated on these sorts of intra-celebrity conversations, was recently resurrected; in the comeback issue, Raf Simons talks with George Condo (a journalist chimes in occasionally) and Jennifer Jason Leigh talks to Phoebe Cates.

The friend doesn’t even have to be famous. In Rolling Stone’s current feature with the press-shy pop star Sia, the author announces himself as a longtime friend of hers. And New York magazine’s recent exclusive interview with Soon-Yi Previn, Woody Allen’s wife, was conducted by a longtime friend of Mr. Allen, to howls of dismay on Twitter.

These stories trade on the perceived intimacy of friendships as a proxy for actual insight, abdicating the role of an objective press in the process. The covenant implicit in celebrity profiles is that the journalist is a proxy for the reader, not the subject. But in the thirst for exclusive access, the old rules get tossed by the wayside — ethics become inconvenient. Friendship should be a disqualifier, not a prerequisite.

That is a disservice to fans, who miss out on what happens when someone in the room is pushing back, not merely taking dictation. Imagine how wildly illuminating probing conversations with Beyoncé about “Lemonade” or Ms. Swift about “Reputation” would have been, a boon to the curious as well as an opportunity for the interview subjects to be shown in their full complexity. But rather than engage on those terms, these stars have become hermetic. It’s a shame: We’ll never know the answers to the questions that aren’t asked.

R.I.P., the Celebrity Profile

 

[MissMagAddict]

Elle Australia Editor Justine Cullen Out
Cullen has been with the title since she started as an intern 28 years ago.

Elle Australia’s editor in chief is leaving the magazine.

Justine Cullen, who has led Elle Australia since its modern inception in 2013 under Bauer Media through a licensing deal with Hearst, revealed her departure on Tuesday via Instagram. Her seemingly abrupt departure marks the second such editor exit at a Bauer-Hearst title in just over a month. Kellie Hush, editor in chief of Harper’s Bazaar Australia, similarly revealed in early August her exit after six years at the helm, saying she’s off to start a fashion brand.

As for Cullen, who started her career 28 years ago at Elle as an intern, she cited a number of reasons for her exit, including excessive travel commitments, a growing family and a media industry that’s changing rapidly.

“Like many women my age and in my situation, I’m realizing that this thing I’ve been so focused on my whole life doesn’t actually work for me anymore,” Cullen wrote.

She added that so far this year, she’s flown the “equivalent of around the world six times” and lamented, with a fourth son on the way, that this has meant “a lot of bedtime stories missed in the name of fashion.” Cullen went on to say that she’s been “doggedly determined to ‘have it all'” but feels it’s time to simply “move on.”

“This industry is changing. I’ve had the best of it,” Cullen wrote. “My priorities have changed, too, and the work I do, how and why I do it, needs to change with them.”

Cullen added: “Helming this magazine during this powerful era of womanhood and yes, even at this challenging time in publishing (from restriction breeds creativity!), is something I will always consider a gift. I leave her in the team’s capable hands, coming off consecutive year-on-year readership increases in print and with the strongest digital business in the company.”

Fiorella Di Santo, general manager of Bauer Media and publisher of Elle, cited the magazine’s innovative content and awards for covers under Cullen’s leadership and also a continuous year-over-year growth in readership. She added, “Justine’s contribution not only to Elle but also o the magazine industry has been significant.”

Bauer said in a statement that Genevra Leek will become acting editor in chief of Elle Australia, following Cullen’s departure.
source | wwd

 

[axiomatic]

Ruthie Friedlander Exit InStyle Magazine – WWD
Kali Hays
2-3 minutes

InStyle’s masthead seems to be shrinking.

Ruthie Friedlander, the fashion glossy’s director of special projects for the last two years, has left the magazine. Her exit marks at least the second departure in a span of two weeks, as longtime editor Kahlana Barfield Brown recently left, too.

Friedlander was the deputy editor of Elle’s web site before moving to InStyle, but had recently been on the other side of media as she started The Chain, a “peer support network” for women in the fashion and entertainment industry dealing with eating disorders.

In an Instagram post from a resort in Arizona, Friedlander said she’d missed her InStyle “family for the last leg of fashion month” and that “surely, will miss them beyond now as well.” She added that she’s “found gratitude in the opportunity I’ve been given to find a new beginning. So here’s to what’s next.”

Friedlander could not be immediately reached for comment, nor could a representative of InStyle.

The exits come as the magazine’s relatively new owner, Meredith Corp., continues to sell and reshape titles around new business objectives. While InStyle is one of the few former Time Inc. properties Meredith has decided to keep as part of an effort to focus on lifestyle content, the title is suffering, like many other magazines, with decreased ad revenue and tightening budgets. For July, combined desktop and mobile visits to the site dropped 11 percent year-over-year, while print readership fell about 11 percent, as well, according to data from MPA the Association of Magazine Media.

Laura Brown was named editor in chief just over two years ago.

Ruthie Friedlander Marks Another Exit From InStyle Magazine

 

[axiomatic]

wwd.com
Bruce Weber Photographs Hercules Magazine – WWD
Kali Hays
6-7 minutes

For independent magazine Hercules, deciding to work again with photographer Bruce Weber came down to a simple question of loyalty.

“Of course we considered not,” David Vivirido, cofounder and co-editor in chief of the men’s fashion magazine, told WWD of working with Weber recently for the 25th issue, which is out next week. “When you read [negative] articles about your contributors, you have to put it on the scale, if it’s someone who’s been supporting you and loyal to you, and then you have to make a decision.”

Vivirido, a native of Spain, where he started Hercules almost 13 years ago with co-editor Francesco Sourigues, said loyalty to Weber tipped the scale in favor of work. He noted that the photographer has been slowly working more in recent months, less than a year after more than a dozen male models accused him in a New York Times article and an individual lawsuit of sexual misconduct. Many of the accusations among the men were similar, involving Weber calling them to private photography sessions or off-set meetings and initiating a hands-on breathing exercise that tended to move toward the models’ genitals, groping without consent and coerced nude photographs involving a sense by the models that refusing would mean no more work. Some magazines and brands were quick to distance themselves from Weber at the start of the year given the numerous claims.

Weber — who also wrote briefly on a theme of loyalty in an introduction to his Hercules shoot — has flatly denied all of the accusations and that seems to have been good enough for Vivirido. Speaking on behalf of the magazine as a whole, he alluded to a cultural moment of “moral censorship” that needs be pushed back on and the idea of “different perceptions” of actions on a photo shoot or styling session.

“We live in a time when everyone likes to play judge and jury at the same time and accusations are simply accusations, that’s what they are,” the editor and stylist explained. “It seems like now with social media, it’s almost like going back to the Middle Ages — you’re always [assumed] guilty and there’s no way to defend yourself. I’m not saying that the accusations are true or not, because it’s not our position to do that.”


But the idea that individuals or industries can work with whomever they choose because of “art” without some degree of public blowback, given the ongoing momentum of #MeToo, seems hopeful, at best. More powerful men than Weber have been fired and branded as cultural pariahs over serious accusations of harassment and assault (although Bill Cosby, so far, is the only one to be tried and sentenced for one of his allegedly many crimes against women), kicked off by multiple high-profile accusations against Harvey Weinstein and fully on exhibit Thursday at the controversial hearings over the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court. While sexual crimes are certainly nothing new, and the accusations against Weber are far from as extreme as those against other high-profile men, the number of allegations that have been corroborated over time has only increased the public’s willingness to believe accusers.



Still, to Vivirido, this is an era when “anyone could just come up with a story about any of us” and he felt something of an obligation to support Weber, since the photographer first worked with the magazine in 2016, before any of the allegations against him were public. But a big part of Vivirido’s decision to work with Weber relates to a perception that the accusations don’t reach a level of seriousness that made it necessary to cut ties with the photographer, who’s a longtime inspiration and aesthetic idol for Vivirido and Hercules.

Of what Weber is being accused of, Vivirido said it should be investigated but, “of course, it’s not the same as someone accused of something like [r*pe].” He added another “of course” when asked if this perceived lack of severity in the accusations was part of the decision to work with Weber again, actually in an extended capacity. Weber’s photographs make up about 40 pages of the new issue and the cover.

At any rate, Vivirido stressed that Weber and his team worked with an “overwhelming” level of professionalism on set. While the misconduct accusations against Weber stem entirely from private sessions and meetings, Vivirido said private work “is not something we can comment on.” He suggested, “Perhaps those are the [shoots] that shouldn’t be happening.”

Vivirido seems far from an outlier in his decision to work with Weber again. He said all of the brands that appear in the shoot knew where their clothes were headed and who would be photographing them — he got no push back on requests. The mix of European and American brands included in Weber’s shoot are Margaret Howell, James Perse, Prada, Hanes, Levi’s, Agnès b., Calvin Klein 205W39NYC, Helmut Lang, Balenciaga, Dior Homme, Rick Owens, Dries Van Noten, Marni, Phillip Lim and Jil Sander, among others. And the issue, including 100 limited hardcover copies, is being sold exclusively at Carla Sozzani’s 10 Corso Como.

Even with tacit support from the industry, Vivirido isn’t expecting everyone to like the decision to work with Weber again, but maybe he’s courting controversy a bit. The last time he worked with Weber was for the fall 2017 issue, which was still available when the accusations were made public. “Overnight, everything sold out,” he said.

Bruce Weber Getting Back to Work With Hercules Magazine

 

[MDNA]

Condé Nast said to be planning Hong Kong magazine launch; Vanity Fair the likely choice

Vincenzo La Torre

Friday, 28 Sep 2018, 7:46AM

Rumours that glossy magazines publisher Condé Nast is finally coming to Hong Kong have been swirling for months and reached fever pitch during the early days of the Paris shows.

According to a number of sources within the fashion industry, the company behind publications such as Vogue, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker and GQ is set to launch one of those glossies, most likely Vanity Fair, in Hong Kong.

Launching yet another Asian edition of Vogue that would inevitably be a second-rate cousin of Vogue China seems far-fetched, and people with knowledge of the matter have mentioned the more highbrow Vanity Fair as a more likely choice.

A top executive of Condé Nast International who is in Paris for Fashion Week wouldn’t comment on the matter, but the Post has spoken to people who have been approached for roles including fashion director, and to a source working in fashion in Asia who said the publisher had hired a creative director, who would move from the Philippines to take up the position.

Condé Nast has approached Desiree Au in connection with its regional plans. Reached for comment, Au said: “I cannot comment on what Condé Nast's plans are in Hong Kong …". Au was until recently publisher of Time Out Hong Kong.

The plan seems to be to launch the magazine in 2019 (at least one Chinese supermodel has already been approached for an upcoming photo shoot).

Other than Thailand, Condé Nast has no presence in Southeast Asia – although, unbeknown to many, the company did attempt to launch a Singapore edition of Vogue almost 20 years ago. The short-lived magazine, which boasted a team including former Vogue Australia editor Nancy Pilcher and famed creative director Ronnie Cooke Newhouse, was one of the few failures in the history of the illustrious publisher, which has recently unveiled international editions of Vogue in the Middle East, Poland and the Czech Republic.

Amid declining print sales, competition from online platforms and from social media, and with lower advertising budgets for luxury brands in the United States and Europe, it’s no surprise that Condé Nast would seek to increase its presence in Asia, even though in recent years Hong Kong has seen many publications close, from Chinese-language newspapers to high-end luxury titles.

The arrival of Condé Nast in Hong Kong – and perhaps even Singapore, where the publisher is said to be testing the waters for a possible launch of technology publication Wired – would inject some energy into luxury publishing in Asia.

https://m.scmp.com/lifestyle/fashion-beauty/article/2165993/conde-nast-said-be-planning-hong-kong-magazine-launch

 

[Benn98]

So Anna commissioned the fashion elite to her Paris party held in honour of Radhika Jones, which in layman's terms would mean she's trying to either drum up more advertising and/or steer VF more into a more fashion direction. It's not hard to court the fashion set to be honest, in fact I would argue that VF already have most of those brands in their pocket. What they should be focusing on is Radhika's shortcomings instead - entrench her more into the big corporations, get her name on the Royals gala list, familiarise her with global diplomatic contacts, or better still, the British aristos.

Here are the images. Sorry, I would post them but with VF recently introducing a paywall I don't want to take the chance.

• Anna Wintour Honors Vanity Fair’s Radhika Jones with a Paris Cocktail Party

 

[Benn98]

This news is shocking! 11%??? That's a lot! I actually thought under the new owners InStyle will be managed like a fashion's magazine, but that's hardly possible when you bear in mind that it's the only 'fashion' title on the corporation's roster. You are the company you keep!

Ruthie Friedlander Marks Another Exit From InStyle Magazine

The director has been at InStyle for two years.

By Kali Hays on September 28, 2018
https://wwd.com/subscriptions/promo...uly4th&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=wwd.com
InStyle’s masthead seems to be shrinking. Ruthie Friedlander, the fashion glossy’s director of special projects for the last two years, has left the magazine. Her exit marks at least the second departure in a span of two weeks, as longtime editor Kahlana Barfield Brown recently left, too.

Friedlander was the deputy editor of Elle’s web site before moving to InStyle, but had recently been on the other side of media as she started The Chain, a “peer support network” for women in the fashion and entertainment industry dealing with eating disorders.

In an Instagram post from a resort in Arizona, Friedlander said she’d missed her InStyle “family for the last leg of fashion month” and that “surely, will miss them beyond now as well.” She added that she’s “found gratitude in the opportunity I’ve been given to find a new beginning. So here’s to what’s next.”

Friedlander could not be immediately reached for comment, nor could a representative of InStyle.

The exits come as the magazine’s relatively new owner, Meredith Corp., continues to sell and reshape titles around new business objectives. While InStyle is one of the few former Time Inc. properties Meredith has decided to keep as part of an effort to focus on lifestyle content, the title is suffering, like many other magazines, with decreased ad revenue and tightening budgets. For July, combined desktop and mobile visits to the site dropped 11 percent year-over-year, while print readership fell about 11 percent, as well, according to data from MPA the Association of Magazine Media.

Laura Brown was named editor in chief just over two years ago.

Source: WWD.com

 

[tigerrouge]

What they should be focusing on is Radhika's shortcomings instead

I was thinking to myself this morning - Radhika is absolutely in step with the times she's in.

We're all familiar with the glamour and the stereotypical 'look' of Old Hollywood, the reproduction of which was Vanity Fair's trademark. But in the age of diversity, there are a lot of people whose stories weren't represented at all by Hollywood, so falling back on any form of old-style glamour feels like the media is still trying to exclude them, hence its disappearance from the pages of Vanity Fair (and most other magazines).

I do see a future where people start taking stereotypical glamour in new directions - but it's probably going to be a while before the media reaches a place of confidence about how to represent people in this way.

But given that editors seem to get replaced at the same speed as managers of sports teams, will Radhika still be around when magazines are allowed to have fun again? She might not get the chance to show us that she could make a great magazine. She might just be the hire that satisfies the current demand for a more 'conscious' take on content.

 

[vogue28]

^ he was laid off. He did not show up at work since his nomination. Why ? I don't know but his presence at Elle was useless and he is useless. Good riddance

Kyle replied to someone’s question on Instagram who had asked about Elle and he stated he left to “follow his dreams”. He also went on to state that magazines will soon be a thing of the past and out of business within the next 3-4 years. Someone’s bitter!

 

[Benn98]

I wish Tonchi would STOP dragging McCarthy's W, especially considering the near-death position his W is currently in! Just stop. I'm also surprised that he's got all these grand ideas for W, own awards show, celebrity talks, whatnot. Why only now, you should've done this ages ago! Tonchi is like the Taylor Swift of the fashion industry. Too little, too late. Glamour has been running their awards for some time now, Elle too. In theory W should've jumped on these ideas when they launched their Best Performances issue years ago. Speaking of, wonder who they'll club together for next February's issue. That's if they'll even be alive by then because the timing of this interview, complete with the endorsements (Lynn Hirschberg, your employee, seriously?????) is suspect.

LOL @ him getting notes over the gatefold cover, I'm sure Graydon wwas the one who complained about that to Newhouse.

STEFANO TONCHI REFLECTS ON HIS PROUDEST MOMENTS IN PRINT

written by Alexandra Ilyashov October 5, 2018

When it comes to cross-pollinating fashion, art, and Hollywood, few people do it quite like Stefano Tonchi, much less in his elegant, impeccably suited, innately chic manner. As W prepares to enter the next chapter of its history, Tonchi embarks on a trip down memory lane.

How did your passion for glossies begin?
I grew up in love with magazines. I remember, before I was 18, going at 5 a.m. to the railway station in Florence, where there was a newsstand that would get magazines from England, like New Musical Express. The first real magazine I put together was Westuff, in 1984: I was writing, art-directing, overseeing creative design, and trying to sell ad pages. It was modeled after Interview; this mix that would become very much my obsession— fashion, entertainment, and art. Westuff was self-financed for many years, and then we got sponsorship from Pitti Immagine, when they started a small publishing company, mostly focused on books. It was an energetic, creative moment for Florence. Westuff lasted for four years, available internationally, with 25,000 copies per issue, in Italian and English. Mr. [Giorgio] Armani loved the magazine so much, he wanted to buy it, so Westuff became Emporio Armani Magazine.

What brought you to L’Uomo Vogue?
Well, I was going to shows for Westuff, and during one [Fashion Week] trip, I was asked if I wanted to join L’Uomo Vogue. It was such a successful, incredibly prestigious publication. To be a journalist in Italy, you had to go through a very established process, working for five years, then take an exam to be accredited…but it was actually a way for fascism to control journalists; Mussolini created it in the ’20s. At university, I studied political science and was interested in journalism, but there wasn’t really a school for journalists then. The beauty of L’Uomo Vogue then was that you really got to travel, and the issues were focused on one place. My life at L’Uomo Vogue was fantastic, a very fun time.

What brought you to NYC?
My last year there, there was a new editor in chief, Franca Sozzani, and she let me move to New York, working for Condé Nast International, on L’Uomo Vogue, Casa Vogue, Italian Glamour, things like that. I also had personal interests for moving to New York. I was living with David Maupin, who’s now my husband, and he wanted to be in New York, because being an art dealer in Milan was not that successful. Then, kind of out of nowhere, I met this lady, Alexandra Penney, who was then the new editor in chief of Self. She was doing super well but was frustrated the magazine was not considered a fashion magazine. She became an important mentor.

What appealed to you about Self?
Alexandra got enchanted by the idea of me working for her, and I was like, “No, thank you, I’m happy at L’Uomo Vogueand I don’t want to work at a fitness magazine.” But I really wanted a green card, and I wanted to be paid in American dollars, not Italian lira. She offered me so much money and freedom. I spent six years at Self.

What was that like?
I’d call them my formative American years, because technically Condé Nast turned me into an American journalist; it changed how I write. Anglo-American journalism is much more about facts and lists, while Italian journalism is much more about opinions. I also did a tour of America, doing focus groups, learning things like, everyone is brunette, but they only like blondes; everything is too expensive, but if you show cheap clothes, they’re not happy. Magazines were run by focus groups then. It was such a wake-up call for me, coming from a magazine like L’Uomo Vogue, where the “focus group” was, “Did Mr. Armani call and love it?”

And then you went to J.Crew. How did that happen?
I met [then-CEO] Emily Woods socially. Emily said, “My father [J.Crew founder Arthur Cinader] is leaving; this investment group, TPG, is taking over, so J.Crew will change completely over the next year, and I want you to work with me on this.” It was a big salary, let’s put it that way. I worked at J.Crew for two years as creative director. We shot 18 to 20 catalogs every year, plus the ad campaigns, and opened stores.

Was returning to the editorial world always your plan?
I absolutely thought I would go back. David Granger and my best friend, Scott Omelianuk, had a huge fight with Art Cooper, and they left GQ for Esquire. Quite a scandal! One year into my time at J.Crew, David and Scott wanted me to join them at Esquire. I was like, “I just got this J.Crew job, and it pays a lot of money.” A year later, they called me back again, and I said yes. I took a huge salary cut from J.Crew to Esquire, but I wanted to go back [to editorial] and I liked David. We had a great relationship.

What did you get out of your years at Esquire?
As a journalist, the holy grails were Esquire and The New York Times. But when I arrived at Esquire, it was in the worst shape possible… on the brink of closing. We had to rebuild, slowly, slowly, slowly. I used to call [Esquire’s then-publisher] Valerie Salembier the mortician, because she’d take a [magazine] corpse and revive it. [Laughs]

Then you headed to the other holy grail: The New York Times. How’d that happen?
I was happy with David and Esquire; Adam Moss asked me to apply for the job, on the suggestion of Amy Spindler, whom Adam really respected. Adam asked me to present him ideas. What I did was put books, magazines, things I’d done, in a box and sent it him; I got the job. I didn’t even think about a résumé! I only worked with Adam for six months before he left for New York.

How did you come up with the concept for T?
It wasn’t 100 percent mine, but I saw European newspapers putting out supplements with one-letter names, like La Repubblica’s D, and Financial Times had started doing How to Spend It. So I thought, let’s call it T. I worked with designers, editors that were at the Times, including Lynn Hirschberg, who was working on the Sunday magazine. With a lot of patience, understanding, and convincing, I brought them all to T. It grew fast; we went from 12 issues to 14 to 16, and we made a huge amount of money for the company. We just ran with it, and when it became a big success, nobody stopped it, because the magazine had become something incredibly valuable. I always hear that T was such a business success; yes, I know, but also, readers loved it. I remember and hear, still, people talking about [T’s early days], how it was this fantastic present you’d receive, such beautiful images and design.

How did Condé lure you back to helm W?
I had a little bit of an obsession with Mr. [Si] Newhouse; every time I’d meet with him, he was curious and seductive. He’d offer me different jobs that I refused. He wanted me to run House & Garden; he said, “If you don’t take it, we will close it.” I told him I was happy where I was, and they closed the magazine. At some point, [Condé] told me they had a great opportunity. I was thinking it was Architectural Digest, which was already in trouble at the time, but it was W. I thought, “What a strange choice!”

What was W like at that time?
I’d look at it sometimes, but I always found Vogue more interesting than W. I’m quite a popular [culture] journalist. I was never about being a snob; I come from a city like Florence where the aristocrats were everything, so I always hated aristocracy. These are all the things, the fascinations W had — the snobbishness, “I’m better than you” approach. Even when they did collaborations with artists, it was all about showing, “We know more than you do.”

Why were you drawn to the job?
Well, Si said, “You can do whatever you want with it; that was called T, this is called W, it’s just a different letter, technically.” It was seductive to come back to Condé Nast; I was going through a lot of arguments with The New York Times. I think Mr. Newhouse found me in a very specific week, when I was just like, “F**k it, if they don’t understand it, they’ll pay for it.” I love that the first person they took [as successor] was Sally [Singer]; they thought I was the most commercial person on the planet, and wanted to go back to doing “real journalism.” Those were hard words to read.

What are your proudest achievements at W?
I brought a completely different approach to the entertainment world, and made W a player in that arena. Last year, we had the only Daniel Day-Lewis story; in October, we’ll have the only Bradley Cooper story. We’ve been discovering actors and actresses, putting them on the cover before anyone else. Jennifer Lawrence, Emma Stone, Rooney Mara, Jessica Chastain, Lupita Nyong’o, Millie Bobby Brown, Alicia Vikander—I can go on and on. There were artist profiles before my time, but I think we really cover contemporary artists in every issue; and the Art Issue is kind of an event, I’m very proud of that.

Did you have any turf wars within Condé regarding entertainment coverage?
I’m not shy to say, I remember when we did our first triple-gatefold cover, with Jennifer Lawrence, Jessica, Chastain, Emma Roberts, Zoé Kravitz—quite a cover—I got a note, “Never again.” Triple-gatefold belongs only to Vanity Fair, and people got upset we did that. That started a conversation, but W has always been fighting for its space in this company.


Soon, W may not need to fight over turf…
The news that W is for sale makes a lot of sense, because this brand had a fantastic history before Condé Nast, and I think we’ll have a great future outside of Condé Nast. Or, maybe, in collaboration with Condé Nast! I think it’s great that [Condé Nast] recognizes the value of this brand. They could’ve decided to close it, if there wasn’t value, or if it was losing so much money, as some people like to say.

Will you stay with W if it leaves Condé Nast?
I think I will. I hope to find investors who want to take over W, because I really believe in the potential of this brand. Outside of Condé Nast, there are so many things we could do if we’re not in competition with Vogue or Vanity Fair. We could have our own conference circuit, our own celebrity talks, our own fashion awards. Why did we change frequency, going down to eight issues? You have to be out in the print market when there’s actually print advertising, and when people want to look at a magazine. People don’t go to the newsstand every month. They don’t even expect it [as a subscription] at home. They’re consuming daily. So when do you put out an issue? When you can offer, and finance, something exceptional.

Who cares about going to the newsstand?
Soon there will be no newsstand! Why stick to paradigms that nobody cares about anymore? It’s about breaking the rules, which is W’s tradition. Who have you mentored over the years? I hope I’ll be judged by the people I’ve worked with. I think I’m one of the few editors in the building that has created successful editors [in chief]. I was so proud of Edward [Enninful] when I heard [about British Vogue], but I was proud of myself, too. I gave him the platform to get that job, to show his quality. When Jonathan Newhouse said he was looking for a new editor for Vogue Mexico, I told him there was one person he had to meet: Karla Martinez de Salas. And I’m sure that Rickie [De Sole] has a great future after W; if she becomes the editor of some magazine, I’ll say, “I told you!”

Any advice for the next generation of editors?
Follow your instincts, stay close to your inspirations, and never stop being curious. If you can, make an extra trip to see that exhibition, that fashion show, that gallery. Staying home and being happy about who you are isn’t going to bring you anywhere.

Stefano’s Fan Club
“Stefano’s radar is attuned far beyond the world of current fashion: There is no wavelength he does not tap into. This is how he plants in W the breadth and breath he provides — and in the milieu it nourishes in turn. His antennae are twitching constantly: His nose and instinct for reading the wind just beyond the horizon, nonpareil. A glimpse of Stefano across a crowded room: Check his gleeful openness, his optimism, like a zealous fisherman striding out into the dawn with a big empty bag to fill. Up for it, down with it, on to it. He’s a cultural activist in the suavest of clothing. Fashion isn’t the half of it…”
—TILDA S WINTON

“Stefano is downright talented. He continues to push the industry forward with his unique vision and his penchant for taking risks. Under his stewardship, the pages of W have been imaginative and the covers, iconic. He is masterful at infusing art, film, fashion, and commerce — with his creativity always grounded in restraint and impeccable taste. He is a trailblazer. I feel privileged to also call him a great friend. His generosity of spirit, quick wit, and warmth are immeasurable.”
—TORY BURCH

“Stefano believes in magazines and the power of what they can be, and he’s a huge believer in talent and where talent will take you. Stefano is a joy to work for, and he’s someone who can accomplish things. It sounds like a small thing, but it really isn’t. Normally in an office, everyone will get sparked, but then the spark dies. He keeps the spark alive and enhances it. He’s very entrepreneurial, so anything is possible. He’s always thinking ahead. In the next 10 years, I imagine W becoming a major multi platform enterprise — the magazine, plus video, a TV series, a talk show, a master class, panel discussions, and events. W represents something much larger than just a magazine, and I see Stefano at the center of it, inventing that new world. ”
—LYNN HIRSCHBERG

Source: Fashionweekdaily.com

 

[Miss Dalloway]

There you go, just when I thought one couldn't dislike him more, you posted this interview! He is so annoying, and such a hack, can't wait to see W fold, or get rid of him, and breathe new life in the title!

 

[vogue28]

A bunch of Condé Nast's November covers (W Magazine's Art Issue, Allure, Glamour and GQ) have each been #CapturedOnGooglePixel3, all notably paid sponsorships via Instagram.

... and they wonder why the industry's in such a bad state?

 

[Deleted member 130879]

I was wondering what that was about too. Disgusting. Mainstream titles are dead.

 

[Melancholybaby]

Stefano wishes his W was a tenth of the magazine Dennis and Patrick's W was. This interview is going to be hilariously ironic in a few months' time.

 

[8eight]

That conde nast google deal isn't great for the industry BUT.... it does make me want one of those phones.
Whoever pulled that off at google deserves a pay rise!

 

[Deleted member 130879]

That conde nast google deal isn't great for the industry BUT.... it does make me want one of those phones.
Whoever pulled that off at google deserves a pay rise!

Didn't Nick Knight/Showstudio work something similar with Apple a few years ago?