Vogue’s Covers Might Be Boring, But They Still Sell

Posted: November 11th, 2009 | Author: Lauren Streib | Filed under: fashion, marketing, publishing | Tags: , , , , | No Comments »

Michelle_vogueOur new contributor Lauren Streib is a Brooklyn-based writer. For the past three years she was at reporter at Forbes, where she covered celebrity earnings and the publishing industry. She’s currently freelancing at The Daily Beast.

For a project today, I pulled the last 12 issues of fashion magazine mainstays Vogue, ELLE, Harper’s Bazaar and W. The cast of cover girls was mostly familiar (Jennifer Aniston, Angelina Jolie, Beyonce) with a few smart surprises (Christy Turlington, Amy Adams). There’s lots to be said about why magazines choose the cover models that they do. But while comparing the rosters across the four titles, I couldn’t get this particular thought out of my mind: What the hell has been going on at Vogue?

When examined over the course of the year, Vogue’s cover cast goes from stalwart Jennifer Aniston to 20-something starlet Blake Lively to first lady Michele Obama to a crew of high-fashion models to does-anyone-even-care-about-her-anymore Sienna Miller. Aside from propping up middling movie stars, what does this magazine stand for? Obama was a nice shot in the arm; not only is she a veritable style star with the required pedigree, but her fame and relevance bolstered newsstand sales to 560,000 (the mag’s average for the first half of 2009 was 384,000). But what does someone like Charlize Theron bring to the table?

Maybe the question is not what Vogue is doing wrong, but what others in the category are doing right, at least from an intellectual standpoint. W, proud of its avant-garde slant and European sensibility, chooses cover subjects that bear a bit of controversy. In 2005, its editors built an entire magazine around Angelina Jole and Brad Pitt while news of the Aniston-Pitt split was still raw. This year, their choices again reek of sex and intrigue. Think Bruce Willis and new wife Emma in bondage. Blake Lively in an itsy-bitsy dress looking like a patriotic pinup. Even Uma Thurman looks like a fashion superhero on October’s cover. W’s list also includes Madonna, Ginnfer Goodwin and Drew Barrymore: Strong, slightly edgy women who embody the W brand.

Same goes for Elle – it’s consistent. Its subjects are look fresh-faced pretty and have Hollywood appeal, and its covers are always tinged with innocent sex appeal. Aniston gets a bustier and Carrie Underwood gets load of bling. Katie Holmes wears a skin tight dress and Megan Fox covers herself up (for once) in white.

But here’s the part that I don’t get. In the first half of the year, single copy sales–which are driven by the appeal of the cover model–were down 3% at Vogue, 12% at ELLE, 13% at Harper’s Bazaar and a whopping 21% at W.

If Vogue’s covers are generally crappy, why do people still buy it on the newsstand?  Because readers love Vogue no matter who’s on the cover? Maybe. Or maybe it’s because when things get tough, consumers go with what’s reliable. They go with the most established brand. After all, W is a luxury product; it’s supposed to maintain exclusivity, not mass appeal. And Elle’s sass isn’t necessarily sustenance. Vogue is uncomplicated and predictable. It’s basic black.

Unfortunately, if the most famous magazine in the world continues to misfire, there’s no way it will remain immune to the realities of print media. It will succumb to sagging newsstand sales just like its peers. Which is why, more than ever, the brand needs to refocus. Wintour reinvigorated the magazine when she arrived; it had become staid after Grace Mirabella’s 17-year run. Can she do it again 20 years later? Let’s hope so. Because if it’s going to be the last mag standing, it should have more to stand on.