Why did they need such expensive digs?
16
I worked in the 1950's for many Vogue & even Junior Bazzar photographers as an assistant ,it was an exciting time .
Today print media is vanishing in it's importance and that excitement I felt as a young too important photographer in the 1950's must surely be realized by young artists in digital media.
I spoke with a former Photography critic -reviewer and past contributor to this newspaper , He said that digital media is so vast today helped by it's immediacy of presentation that he would not today be able to keep up with iit's trends let alone it's vast world wide output. I miss the media world of type faces and rubber cement paste up's but I am afraid paper media is dying it's death and I am myself afraid to attend it's funeral.
5
Memo to Architectual Digest...Please drop the Clever ...
It’s about as nauseating as The Genius Bar.
2
Vanity Fair, I stopped reading this magazine after the Caitlyn Jenner cover. The photograph hid her hands, feet and legs and emphasized her breast enhancements. I thought it was misleading. Concurrent photographs of her never lived up to that glamorization or false presentation.
The money and time devoted to that issue could have been spent on more urgent issues of our time that concern a greater number of people.
12
As a long-time subscriber to the New Yorker, and a sometime subscriber to Vanity Fair, I accuse Conde Nast of paying too much attention to money and too little to the readers. Replacing Graydon Carter has utterly ruined Vanity Fair. The New Yorker continues to veer between being a source of political commentary, limited arts coverage, and humor of wildly varying quality. It seems to have abandoned its mission as a purveyor of New York culture to the world. And now I hear it will change even more in pursuit of younger readers.
Conde Nast has relied on shallow fashion magazines for too long. With someone like Alexander Liberman formerly directing it, they should have established major arts and culture magazines. We have NOT ONE national classical music magazine, while tiny Britain has several. This means a huge audience, millions of people who participate in classical music as listeners, teachers, creators, students, are not being served. Other arts have their magazines, but there is no national magazine for all the arts. Again, a huge population not being served. What Conde Nast lacks is vision and courage. Caving into the internet is not the way forward. Neither is cutting pay to writers. Great writing is the core of any magazine, not its glossy ads.
25
This article really was interesting for me due to the fact the I have never heard of Conde Nast. Being a younger reader I can see how this company is slowly "dying" out. The fact that the younger population has not heard of this means that this company will slowly lose it's follower over the years since it is not gaining any new ones. This is basically natural selection for the company world. Now they could avoid total extinction by maybe trying to hire more younger people but this might not always work. In the end it good just be good for them to go.
2
I cancelled the New Yorker in disgust when it started getting so political.
6
The main stream publications did it to themselves, constant I hate Trump and Hillary lost because of fake news has created a blurr in the minds of people when they hear anything from the msm.
The metoo movement has also played a part. Without sex appeal, magazines cannot sell. also niche publishers on social media are better now. More relevant, risque, and up with the times. MSM just feels like dinosaurs now. Ad supported, patron supported media is the future.
5
I got a trial membership for some of these magazines for few months. Can't afford any of the stuff they recommend. Maybe circulate these magazines for only the few elite?
6
Didn’t they learn the last time they hired a management consultant group (McKinsey) and stupidly shuttered Domino and Gourmet??? That was a huge mistake and still irritates me today. I hope they still kick themselves for letting go of the talented leadership at Gourmet, some of whom went on to create Food52.
24
We still haven't forgiven them for killing Gourmet. No other food magazine we've tried has been as good.
15
I can't speak regarding the other publications, but I hope New Yorker can remain more or less unscathed. But editorial decisions are not disconnected from business decisions, so it's hard to see a happy ending here.
11
I love aspirational magazines, but I never understood the appeal of Vogue. Twenty-year-olds wearing clothes the vast majority of people in clothes they can't afford or look good wearing and makeup so garish and unbelievable. But Meredith folded More because what 40something woman wanted to read about women who are 40something?
19
Fashion magazines after the Second World War maintained some of the Bauhaus school of design mix of the arts ,cinema, photography and pen & ink illustration
in fact fashion in itself as to how it was designed was an
artform. We had fashion magazines that even had textiles sewed in the pages with the photographed model's in that same dress. Their was a sense of exploration of design along with advancement in film and small amera design that allowed fashion to be shot anywhere away from the boring studios.
People did not expect to purchase what they viewed we were selling them a dream and idea that putting testures and colors together is something you also can maek at home.
3
I was staying at Residence Inn on East 48th St. Looked for a copy NY Times before driving out to Long Island to see my brother-- and I couldn't find a Sunday paper! No one could tell me where the nearest newsstand was! ( CVS didn't have paper either.) Growing up in the area in the 1970's & 80's you couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting a newsstand.
Then I read not to long ago, " A little more than 300 newsstands still operate in the city today. Most are in Manhattan, plus a smattering in the Bronx, Brooklyn, and Queens."
It's funny, when you think of it-- I can't remember when I last saw a Millennial or iGen-er buying a newspaper or a magazine, except one teenager who was crazy about Taylor Swift and "would buy anything with news on her".
13
@L.C. Grant
But oddly, the one commercial enterprise in my very small Pacific NW town, a small general store, carried the Sunday NYT. I don't know whether the store continues to carry it, having gone digital.
@L.C. Grant
I saw someone looking through the copy of the NYT he bought to make sure all the sections were there. It was such a nostalgic sight.
I'll never understand the practice of paying exorbitant fees for business advice from 26-year-olds who have no business nor work experience. How does that make any practical sense? From my experience dealing with consulting agencies, it's an antiquated industry that hasn't realized it's obsolete yet.
34
You mean articles about the Kardashians ,Beyonce, poor Hillary, #metoo, lifestyles of the rich and famous,how to make foie gras, how to make sure your child gets into the top preschool, the plight of your illegal maid, non binary people or constant I hate Trump articles aren't selling to people trying to pay medical bills or living in their cars?
What a surprise.
28
It pains me to see print magazines dying off. I grew up a middle class kid on the west coast, and used to buy magazines as a form of fantasy and inspiration. Some of the greatest convergences of art and commerce have taken place because of magazines. Artists like Irving Penn and Man Ray used magazines as a platform for their work. I can say without doubt that magazines are the primary spark that motivated me to move to NYC with no $$ after college and ultimately create a pretty great creative career. And I fear that our current obsession with digital clicks and likes is turning us all into robotic, frazzled buying machines.
35
Some of the problem is time sensitive news. If the Times is yesterday's news today, the the New Yorker is last week's news today. With a subscription it's a $1wk cartoon magazine (I still like the covers though). Times are too fast, magazines too slow.
Loyalty to subscribers is another issue. I've had a NYer subscription since the Saturday Review died. For the NYer to offer new subscribers a half price rate over longtime subscriber just made me so mad. I even kept my subscription through Tina Brown! If the NYer can't be loyal, why should I?
10
The New Yorker has become unreadable and sadly inconsequential. 25 year subscriber. Fewer and fewer articles with any sort of broad appeal. 10 page article on some snail in Chile? Tina Brown where are you?
10
@Bill Johnson The New Yorker is better than ever! The latest issue has me reading past midnight.
10
Wow. There are a lot of comments from people that seem to hate print magazines and/or paying for anything. I love print magazines and I subscribe to many of the CN's mags: W, Vogue, Vanity Fair, CN Traveler to name a few. The ones I don't subscribe to, I buy on the newsstand (like the New Yorker) whenever possible. I am saddened that they seem to be in trouble. But, alas, that's not my point in this comment, just my background. My point is there are a lot of people who love print mags, not least among us are artists who use mags, newspapers and any other ephemera in collages and mixed media works. I would be lost without print media! Yes, reading online is waste-free (I do after all have a digital only sub to NYT, WaPo and Daily Beast), but there is no reason why people who love the print version of a mag should be vilified. We are not all a bunch of east coast elites just looking to see a glossy pic of the scion of our family; many of us are artists who live in fly over country. Some of us are avid re-users and recyclers who pass the print versions on to others later. Some of us prefer the tactile experience of books and mags. (Yes, artists can print digital images but prints are not the same as an original ad from the magazine, the original label from that old can of fruit or the original of anything.) One of my biggest passions in life is flipping through vintage - pre WW2 mags. If everything goes to digital, how will future generations become acquainted with us?
41
@Trixie Spishak
Spot on. These magazines are so much more, in so many ways than the sum of their parts. I'm surprised by the seemingly, to me, almost punitive comments.
I am not arguing with comments or makers of them. Merely staying my opinion.
7
I used to have a subscription to Vogue in college but it was too pretentious and out of sync with my lifestyle after awhile. I think magazines are going down the same route as cable companies. I just stopped an automatic renewal for one publication because they jacked up the price significantly compared to the new subscriber price. Don't expect me to be loyal when you disregard my loyalty.
15
I've been a The New Yorker subscriber since 1983 but although my subscription is at the moment still active I have completely stopped reading the magazine. It started going downhill under Tina Brown and has become a Neoliberal mouthpiece far too often (read David Remnick's fawning articles on Barack Obama and HRC) as the rest of the country was suffering and drowning. When it's time to renew again in the fall I'm going to just cancel. What a pity that such a great magazine has fallen so far.
15
I used to be an avid reader of Vogue, but, since the dawn of Instagram, I no longer feel the need to get a fashion hit from a glossy magazine. Instead, I get it straight (and live) from Eva Chen, Leandra Medine, Shiona Turini, Nicole Warne, Giovanna Bataglia et al. I also see a greater diversity of skin color/body type/pricepoint via this app, which makes my purchasing options vastly wider. But, I have one exception to this no-hardcopy life - Architectural Digest. My mother has issues from 30 years ago that seem fresh, relevant, and aspirational even today.
10
It's probably to her credit that A. Wintour has never become inured to the trappings of celebrity -anyone else might be expected to think it all passé after a while, but she has stayed terminally starstruck.
But this means Vogue is more about actors and actresses than fashion. British Vogue eclipses it in this regard (and many others, if we're being honest).
8
When discussing Conde Nast's online presence, don't forget the entertaining videos by Claire Saffitz of Bon Appetit magazine garnering millions of views!
5
I just don’t care to read the sad business details about a great company.
Would love to see a footnote/reference for this quote: "Europeans, unlike Americans, have yet to give up the magazine habit"
10
Yes I know there are much lower sub prices but nine dollars ($8.99) for a single issue of The New Yorker?
13
There is just too much to read now. Too many choices. People opt for short bits. I will stick with the NewYorker.
15
Wow, judging by the comments here, the magazine business is in serious trouble. I have not yet read one positive comment. Same old story - nobody wants to pay for anything. We have become a nation of whiners and skinflints. Oh, the horror of having to renew a subscription every two years!
24
@Barbyr
That's like saying Sears is closing because people don't want to spend money when in fact it is the lack of quality goods or service.
Actually people pay for a lot if they think it is worth it or relevant. These magazines aren't worth it and they have themselves to blame.
15
@Barbyr. I love magazines, but economics have forced me to scale down considerably. Even two subscriptions add up after a while--as well, I don't have the time I used to to make the expense worth it.
2
@Barbyr
I see positive comments, I have no idea of the ratio of positive/negative.
I am not challenging your comment, merely stating my opinion.
Good and stop blaming the internet. These places decided not to hire real reporters and deal with issues affecting Americans so Americans stopped reading. If they really had something people wanted then people would have subscribed to their online sites. If people pay for Amazon, audio books,anime and porn then they would pay for magazines they enjoyed reading.
They are overflowing with the offspring of the rich and privileged who reside in their own bubbles. The offspring of the Bush clan, the Clinton clan, Mia Farrow, Gloria Vanderbilt, Cuomo ....are hired by the media and publishers to run nonstop stories about the privileged and then they wonder why they are failing.
The market has spoken and it's the grubby little people you never hired but could have done some actual reporting that connected and brought in revenue.
31
@Hellen - "The New Yorker" is so much arrogance condescension from the limousine liberals and their TDS - I stopped subscribing. Like that famous cover of years ago depicting the "fly over" regions of the USA as a desert wasteland, "The New Yorker" is famously out of touch with the rest of the country and refuses to acknowledge that culture in the USA is no longer just found in the NYC as it was perhaps mostly true in the early decades of the 20th century.
10
@Hellen - Totally disagree. How do you pay real reporters when people aren't paying you to read your magazine. The internet has made a HUGE difference for many of us. With the internet I can read articles from a wide variety of magazines. I could never afford to have print subscriptions to all of them, plus my house would inevitably have stacks of magazines sitting there as I tried to work my way through them. The other way the internet sucks attention away from print media is that it offers all sorts of other distractions that take time away from reading hard copy books, magazines, and newspapers.
5
@Les Smith
I agree with what you say, but it is called "The New Yorker", not "The America"
1
Hate the new Glamour and the new Vanity Fair-less photos, more boring text. What gives?
4
@Joanne Vanity Fair has deteriorated since the retirement of Graydon Carter. Now the magazine looks and feels cheap--the paper is different and the font is smaller and harder to read. The covers are ugly. I'm cancelling my subscription at the end of this year.
15
I love the New Yorker, but you cannot, to the best of my knowledge, get just a digital edition. I live in Costa Rica, a print edition with the attendant digital access won't do squat for me. Maybe their marketing dept. needs a bit of revamping while they're at it.
1
The New Yorker is available digitally using the app Texture (a subscription gives access to several dozen magazines).
1
You can buy the digital edition through itunes. I believe this cuts the revenue to Conde Nast by a significant percentage, but I guess they save the cost of printing. Otherwise, you can address the print version to me and I will provide you the online login details.
1
@Eric There is a digital only subscription to The New Yorker available. It's $1 per week for the first 12 weeks, and it renews at $90/year after that. Gets you full access to newyorker.com, the mobile apps and the full archive back to 1920: https://subscribe.condenastdigital.com/subscribe/splits/newyorker/NYR_ho...
4
With the world going to Hell in a handcart, in 2018 do we really need a glossy magazine called 'Brides'?
21
And there’s no magazine called Grooms.
13
@Colenso I mean, there's value in beauty, in dreaming, in the fantasy and escapism. Otherwise, life would be pretty colorless. It can't be all doom and gloom all the time.
@Colenso Every woman who is or was engaged (except for me) bought Brides for the ads. The content is mostly evergreen. They wanted to find the most gorgeous dress and accessories possible. Local magazines provided the ads for the venues.
2
I can’t vouch for all of the Conde Nast brands; the magazines I read: The New Yorker, Vanity Fair, and Wired, are all best in breed. However, I consume all of these magazines either from their websites or for $9.99/month via the Texture app on my iPad. This, of course, is the fundamental problem.
Shutting down or selling off brands is only partially the route to digital transformation. At least it frees up cash to invest in more innovative revenue and distribution models. Conde Nast might be better off seeking answers from Amazon, Google, or Facebook rather than the Boston Consulting Group.
4
@Mark
I still have a subscription to VF and have been one since 1988. I used to love to articles by Dominick Dunne, Chris Hitchens (favorite) and Bob Colacello. Now Colacello's articles are few and far between and the substance is now somewhat lacking for me but I still find it interesting and look forward to it every month.
3
Mobile platforms allow anyone anywhere to be their own micro publisher. These individual content creators can dig into a small niche and if talented may reach a world wide audience from their pocket, and thy can do it "on the go". No longer do we have the need for an office, an art department and a printing press. Often these new content creators bring a much more unique and timely voice than the over hyped curation of people like Anna W. Readers may comment in real time and content creators may reply back in real time. The world has changed. Felix Dennis the publisher of Maxim and many other magazines said 10 years ago his business was dying. He passed away roughly 5 years ago and I don't think he could have ever imagined the speed at which print would be destroyed by platforms like instagram. If I owned assets in old media like print, terrestrial radio, or TV I would have sold a long time ago. I spent money on a PR agent to help my business get into print and local TV and I will never do that again. Besides the benefit of saying "as seen in" it no longer moves the needle. I would imagine these publications would be better served by producing live events that would draw in content creators and leverage the power of these individuals who are eating their lunch. Brands can now advertise directly to their niche targeted demographic and receive real time data. You can't do that with the September issue.
6
When I moved from my apartment to a house 20 years ago, I had to unstuffy closet packed full of back issues of the fashional glossies and then magazines like I.d. They had been kept for their photography and cultural relevancy. The only fashion magazine I now get is delivered free, seasonally, with my Sunday NY Times - but buy Vogue or any fashion/beauty magazine - no! - even though it is a culture I have worked in for most of my life. The content must be relevant to someone, and good for them. But for me, the only subscription I have is to the New Yorker, which I still appreciate for its editorial mix - although recently perhaps too much trump.
7
Years ago, I received Vanity Fair: enjoyed it for the in-depth articles on "interesting" entertainment figures and society miscreants. When it began to become the mouthpiece for Graydon Carter's political rants, I jumped ship. I read VF for fun and relaxation...not subjective political viewpoint.
GQ? Surprised it is even still in business. What kind of magazine can stay in business showing pants that cost $899?
Ditto Traveler...exotic locales and accomodations for the 1%.
Influence and style influencing is not new, nor is it relegated to magazines. But Conde Nast took it to such a level with a brazen disregard for the reality for MOST of us readers, that I could ignore it no more. No doubt even if I could afford it, I would not travel to FIJI and stay in a hotel suite for $5000 a day, wearing a $675 Marc Jacobs beach outfit and my PIAGET watch. It is obscene materialism and consumer waste. Good riddance to all those magazines who prop up that fantasy bubble.
59
So the Newhouses have ordered their underling Sauerberg to cut costs, and he hires a bunch of kids from Boston Consulting to give him "valuable" advice.
I could care less about Anna Wintour, truly one of the greatest legends in her own mind. but I care a great deal about David Remnick and The New Yorker. Oh, yes! Safe today, gone tomorrow.
51
$120 million? Surprise. As much as I enjoyed these magazines in the 1970s and 80s, technology gives us the chance to see the stuff inside them for free. The New Yorker has always been and remains great -- for a small slice of reader. I'm sorry the company is losing money, but with Fantasy Island off the air, it was only a matter of time for Fantasy magazines to halt production, too.
The journalism will find a home; the flash and dash can now be found on Instagram and Snapchat.
3
I was an ardent supporter of Bon Appetite, but when the magazine changed direction and replaced Barbara Fairchild, I tried to stay with them. I didn't last. A lot of content disappeared; the layout became convoluted and challenging to follow; way too much advertising; and it worked hard to bring in 20- and 30-somethings (who clearly were not interested). At about the same time, Consumer Reports changed their format, and I was gone. Consequently, I no longer receive any magazines; by snail or online. I think the magazine format (certainly hard copy) is near death.
15
A few months ago, I received a "complimentary" issue of Golf Digest. It took too much time and several phone calls to figure out who sent it and how to cancel the automatic subscription that had been started for me--and for which I would be held financially responsible. I have never played golf, but I have received Bon Appétit for years--and the address labels were the same. I'm sure the company has propped up its subscription numbers to make it look profitable to a potential buyer, and it's not that I'm into retribution, but I hope they get what they deserve, not what they ask for!
11
These magazines started with the celebrity worship and lost their focus. Glamour used to be paragon of feminism once upon a time along with traditional feminine information and it worked, for a long time now it is trying to push women into thinking the only thing worth caring about is makeup, clothes and boys. I miss the old magazines.
26
I've had a New Yorker subscription for years. Where else can I get a weekly dose of good fiction and interesting articles? However, I can't give away a free subscription to my daughter in her twenties: No thanks, sorry. She's too busy. (OK, she's a medical resident, but still...) Print media is an endangered species. Great magazines like New Yorker and Atlantic and Harpers need to find a way to appeal to the rising generations or they're doomed.
34
I've subscribed to a number of CN publications for multiple years - and have had a New Yorker subscription since my first year in college (many many years ago). Until this past May.
I grew tired of having to call every year or two to renegotiate my subscription rate. Every time The New Yorker came up for renewal my notice listed a renewal price 2.7 times higher than I paid the previous year.
I get a small increase - and I love(d) the content - but I don't have the energy to fight to save a magazine intent on pushing long-term subscribers away.
60
I agree. Just give me the best rate period. I get a renewal for 3 or 4 times the cheapest rate out there being advertised. It’s painful
28
@Craig
Craig...try the Discount Mags website as it has occasional special deals in which you can get The New Yorker for a dollar an issue. Given the current $8.99 cover price, a year of the mag for $47 (47 issues a year) is a good deal. Plus you get the website as well which has a daily number of great articles.
8
@Just A Girl I agree too! I love The New Yorker. Why can't they just give subscribers the best rate and keep us instead of giving the best deal to prospective subscribers?
3
Having worked with Boston Consulting in the past, they send in a bunch of 26-year old MBAs who grind through all the data they can get their hands on, and then tell you to sell businesses and cut a lot of cost (usually people). That's their deal--they give the CEO and board of directors cover to make tough choices these senior leaders have failed to make themselves.
But they are often wrong and long gone when their mistakes become clear. Back in 2004-ish, a company I was with hired Boston Consulting and they told us to sell our main business because, in their view, it was headed into oblivion. We rejected their advice because we thought they didn't understand our business or markets. Fourteen years and billions in profits (and a lot of work) later, we are very happy to have ignored their advice.
It may or may not be the right thing to sell Golf Digest, but these big name management consultants are hardly infallible. It is pretty easy to tell a company to cut costs, fire people or sell a title. It is much harder to predict the future and come up with a plan to fix a company. And like most consultants, they have no skin in the game if they are wrong.
147
@Jack Sonville
I also worked with BCG years ago (early 1990's). We implemented their ill-thought-out recommendations and it was disastrous. (Embrace cross-trained teams, because of course everyone you have hired in the last 35 years should be able to do every single function in the company, no matter how ill-suited they are to the task by reason of their backgrounds or experience! When employees prove that they cannot literally do every single function in the company, fire them!) We then stupidly kept trying to make their suggestions work for another several years. Finally, in the late 90's we ended up going back to the way things were (with a couple "get-with-the 21st-century" upgrades) ten years prior. What a waste of millions of dollars. I have no respect for them or their work. Whenever I hear that they are attached to any restructuring, I just remember how hard we had to work back then to undo their crappy near-ruination of our business. And you're right. Their so-called experts are all a bunch of kids with no real world experience, fresh out of B-school with no understanding of how to manage a multi-generational, multi-ethnic and diverse work force.
57
@Trixie Spishak - I don't know what company it was, but a few years back a neighbor's daughter and one of her classmates, fresh out of college, got jobs with a consulting firm at huge salaries. I couldn't help wondering just what kind of advice these young people with no real-world experience could provide. When, as a "mid-career professional," I was in a grad school course that mixed new college grads and people who had been working for a number of years, it was easy to tell who knew something about how businesses actually worked and how people behaved in the workplace vs. those who had dutifully read the assignments but had no real world knowledge. The "youngsters" often brought fresh perspectives, but there was just so much they didn't know.
7
From a strictly visual point of view in regards to US Vogue's fashion editorials, they can't hold a candle to their European counterparts. The European issues always did it better but now it's embarrassing. The US version seems adrift with no visual point of view. And when you compare the new look / cover design of their other titles it looks as though they've given up on print media...how sad.
25
@tim Totally agree. Conde Nast actually needs to get rid of Anna Wintour, not keep her. You used to be able to differentiate Vogue from the other fashion magazines because of its high taste level and creativity. That changed when they brought her on. Her taste is so pedestrian and boring.
35
@tim
Exactly.
Brings to mind Grace Coddington (last name spelling isn't correct, can't remember that), who was the Creative Director of British Vogue and had a roving central role that included
Vougue's European operations. Her memoir is a stellar read.
3
This is the end of the beginning. I expect to see more announcements like this in the future. The marquee titles, Vogue, Vanity Fair and The New Yorker, are safe only for the time being. But what about next year. The passing of an era. How did it get to this?
17
The comment that Conde is too quick to close magazines and not willing to look for other ways to develop them is spot on. The company ended up having to revive Domino and Gourmet after foolishly shuttering them in the 2000s after advice from McKinsey.
43
@Victoria Spot on! What company chooses to keep “Bon Appetite” and close down the venerable, excellent “Gourmet”? Still sad remembering the day I received BA instead of Gourmet…no comparison.
41
@Victoria Use to subscribe to Bon Appetit and Gourmet and still would until the advertising became more than the content. Have tried Epicurious which is a failure. Very few new recipes. I wish I had a solution.
7
@charlie, the Times' Food section is quite good. I also watch several of the PBS cooking shows.
americastestkitchen.com has a free 14 day trial membership that might be worth a look. They have helpful equipment and food product reviews, in addition to recipes that focus on cooking techniques.
1
I've been a subscriber of Vanity Fair for decades and since Graydon Carter stepped down as Editor, the magazine has been in freefall in my opinion. I used to read virtually all of the articles but now I can get thru an issue in a few hours. Boring is the way I describe Vanity Fair now. I will not be renewing my subscription.
28
@susan I'm willing to give the new editor some time to find her footing. Those were some pretty good shoes to fill, after all. But I agree her tenure has been a bit disappointing so far. The articles are so much shorter than they used to be. The recent article about the Toronto serial killer seemed half-finished.
8
@susan I agree. Vanity Fair has degenerated since the retirement of Graydon Carter. The magazine looks ugly (what's up with that new, tiny font? the paper feels cheap, too). The magazine simply doesn't interest me anymore. I'm cancelling my subscription.
2
@Annie Yes! That's exactly the story I thought of, too. It was awful--superficial and boring (which is something you wouldn't expect to say about a serial killer story). There was no "there" there and never would've seen the light of day in Graydon Carter's VF.
The demise of this company is truly self inflicted, senior management to this day have exorbitant expense accounts, salaries for over Million dollars, black car at their families beck and call. Editors are hired because they are personal friends or lovers with no editorial experience. The digital studios are used by executives spouses with no charge. Si who was an amazing leader must be turning on his grave. Wintour has ruined every title she has put her hand on. Lucky, Teen Vogue, Brides, Self (this magazine was a huge money maker) and now Glamour, the most hideous magazine on the stands. She should be fired with Sauerberg, Martinez and Mack.
55
Many reasons for the demise. Among them the political turn some of their magazines have taken. People read those magazines to escape, not to be indoctrinated.
Other reason: who thinks it's on everyone's wish list to dream of outrageous clothes, and not particularly beautiful, at outrageous prices.
And who wants to be lectured, not informed?
I for one have canceled many subscriptions, as I am tired of all of the above. Identity politics seeped in their various publications, and am tired of it.
51
I am tired of politics invading every section of the New York Times, too. Style, Food, Real Estate.... I stopped watching national morning news shows because they are filled with politics. I don't want to hear about it …. I want real news that I can use.
17