Vanity Fair October 2015 : Mark Zuckerberg by Annie Leibovitz

[LastNight]

vanityfair.com

 

[YourMonster]

Fantastic cover. Very arresting image.

 

[GIVENCHYlover]

WTF, too much text

 

[t-rex]

Was Rihanna in Cuba scrapped?

 

[Benn98]

It's a great image, but he looks so old here. Rolling my eyes at what I'm assuming is a clichéed blackboard with mathematical formulas, alluding to his 'intellectual capabilities'. I find him vastly overrated. The last person I'd have expected on Vanity Fair. The duo of Larry Page and Sergey, or Marissa would've made more sense to me, especially right now. They deserve this.

At least based on the coverlines this looks like yet another great issue. I'd have to flip through it before I buy it though.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

Although far from a cover face, how wonderful to see someone of interest, and of interesting things to say on the cover!

They really didnt have to put the whole content on the cover, i guess intent to compensate for him being on the cover, rightly so, i doubt he will be a great selling draw at the newsstands!

 

[MON]

It's very VF I must say. But not that great but still better than Taylor's mistake. Really nice to see someone new, interesting and not dead.

Hmmm so what for was Rihanna's shoot. November

Do they still have Table of Contents? Seems like they transferred it to the cover

 

[SpeakThatJDunn]

Where is rihanna's cover?!

 

[Hchloe]

Yawn. I'm so over tech people and Annie Leibovitz needs to go.

 

[tigerrouge]

I've got very intolerant in my old age. I look at this cover and think, "if a rich, successful woman was on that level of physical attractiveness, you wouldn't see her on the front of any magazine, so why am I forced to look at THIS?" I know those double standards aren't going away, but I'm tired of them.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

^ Great point, i second it!

 

[gazebo]

This ain't pretty.

 

[arlekindearrabal]

This ain't pretty.

The photoshopping is awful as it has been lately. He looks inbred.

 

[justaguy]

I've got very intolerant in my old age. I look at this cover and think, "if a rich, successful woman was on that level of physical attractiveness, you wouldn't see her on the front of any magazine, so why am I forced to look at THIS?" I know those double standards aren't going away, but I'm tired of them.

Ditto!!

 

[dfl-001]

Excellent point tigerrouge.
And it doesn't help that everyone in front of Leibovitz's camera looks so unhappy.

 

[KoV]

I've got very intolerant in my old age. I look at this cover and think, "if a rich, successful woman was on that level of physical attractiveness, you wouldn't see her on the front of any magazine, so why am I forced to look at THIS?" I know those double standards aren't going away, but I'm tired of them.

I know attractiveness is subjective, but I don't think he's any worse looking than Chelsea Clinton or Gabourey Sidibe. Heck, why not throw SJP and Michelle Obama in there as well. I like or love all of those women and would gladly read a feature on each of them. I admire that they've accomplished things in a culture where physical beauty in a woman in ascribed inordinate value. Each of them have been featured on major magazine covers (some of them time and time again) discussed in these forums. I don't think such a majority of posters were ever so quick to cut them down for their looks as has happened in this case. Maybe they did, and I just didn't notice.

Mark Zuckerberg is not a model or actor, he's on the cover due to his enormous cultural influence. He gives hundreds of millions to charity, etc. etc. etc. Should be really be denied the cover of a non-fashion magazine because he doesn't look like Brad Pitt?

 

[tigerrouge]

I'm just tired of the double standard, where the media selects women on the basis of their beauty as the most important factor for why they should take centre stage on a magazine cover, while men still get more of a free pass on their appearance.

Like I say, I've reached a point of personal intolerance where I want the men to meet the minimum requirements as well. If I'm going to look at them, I want them to put as much effort into it, as is demanded from the women. We all like looking at beauty, so let's see more of it from the boys. These rich men have the money to pay for proper haircuts and so on, so there's no real excuse.

A woman can be an impressive powerhouse of meaningful achievement for decades of her life, but when it comes to the media highlighting her work, she can still be made to feel a failure because she doesn't look like Gisele - and even Gisele is made to feel bad about being Gisele, for all sorts of other reasons.

 

[KoV]

I'm just tired of the double standard, where the media selects women on the basis of their beauty as the most important factor for why they should take centre stage on a magazine cover, while men still get more of a free pass on their appearance.

I agree there is a double standard. However, that extends beyond just the cover subjects. Most magazines based around looks (fashion/health/beauty) are geared towards Women. Most of the widely-circulated Men's magazines are more about lifestyle or culture. GQ more often than not features a handsome man, well-groomed, in a suit, conforming to standards of male attractiveness. Same goes with Details, etc. There are exceptions, of course, but the majority does. Men's magazines like Esquire or GQ usually value an antiquated sense of masculinity, having lots of capitol... they're promoting a particular image as well, it's just driven by factors different than those chosen by a Women's magazine. I think they're equally shallow and are often also highly influenced by looks. The way you mention the double standards, it's as if GQ regularly featured hideous dudes on the cover. Not the case. It's usually the Channing Tatum/Jake Gyllenhaal/Ryan Gosling type guy that's getting loads of covers. Besides, as I mentioned, women like Chelsea Clinton, Gabourey Sidibe, Michelle Obama, and SJP are often seen as less-than-conventionally-attractive, and yet they get major covers.

Like I say, I've reached a point of personal intolerance where I want the men to meet the minimum requirements as well. If I'm going to look at them, I want them to put as much effort into it, as is demanded from the women. We all like looking at beauty, so let's see more of it from the boys. These rich men have the money to pay for proper haircuts and so on, so there's no real excuse.

I just don't think that two wrongs make a right. Just because some magazines insist on only featuring beautiful women doesn't mean that they should only feature beautiful men. It just means that they should choose ALL cover stars based off more than just their appearance. Caityln Jenner didn't get a Vanity Cover because she's beautiful, she got it because she's got an interesting story and a noble cause. The only men to appear on the cover of Vanity Fair in the past year or so, other than Zuckerberg, were Robert Downey Jr., Bradley Cooper, Channing Tatum (twice!), John Boyega, Jon Hamm, and Harrison Ford.... they're all considered attractive! Zuckerberg is an atypical cover choice.

A woman can be an impressive powerhouse of meaningful achievement for decades of her life, but when it comes to the media highlighting her work, she can still be made to feel a failure because she doesn't look like Gisele - and even Gisele is made to feel bad about being Gisele, for all sorts of other reasons.

I can't think of examples of women who match what you've described. Is Gisele is being made to feel bad currently, it probably has more to do with her highly decision to appropriate another culture's manner of dress for her own selfish gains. No one's telling Elizabeth Warren or Oprah Winfrey or Elle Degeneres or Sheryl Sandburg or Hillary Clinton that they're a failure because they don't look like supermodels.

 

[tigerrouge]

Oprah sorted that problem by making sure she appears on the front of every issue of her own magazine.

 

[KoV]

Oprah sorted that problem by making sure she appears on the front of every issue of her own magazine.

True, but keep in mind, she's been on the over of Vogue, Vanity Fair, and W, to name a few.