Glamour magazine turns itself into left-wing rag, finds itself out of the print business

Glamour magazine has decided to end its print version, heading to a web-only format, according to its parent company, Conde Nast.

In a story from Variety:

After nearly 80 years, the monthly print edition of Condé Nast’s Glamour women’s magazine is ending.

Glamour’s last regularly published print edition, the January 2019 issue, is scheduled to hit newsstands next week, the company announced Tuesday.

It’s another move by Condé Nast away from declining print businesses to pivot to a mostly digital future, a trend that has cut across the entire publishing biz. Glamour has a print circulation of about 2 million, but the brand reaches an audience of around 20 million online, according to the company.

Which is kind of the story of a lot of print media, with all its good and bad reasons. The magazine can't be doing well, deny it as they try to suggest in their statement to Variety.

But the lack of wellness of the magazine is hardly confined to the tech revolution's advances, or the preferences of the Millennials - have you taken a look at what Glamour is like these days?

It's actually pretty hideous. I did with the last issue, viewing it in the doctor's office, and boy did I put that one back on the stack instead of sneak it out in my purse. In the past, the magazine, formerly known as 'Glamour of Hollywood' was a great go-to place for stories about models, makeup, fashion, boyfriends and good girly stuff. One of my mother's favorite photos of me at age 7 was of how I used to lap up her copy of Glamour magazine, seated like a kid with my feet on the couch reading it like a kid reads a storybook.

Today, it's decided that Hollywood for Ugly People is better than actual glamour.

Seriously, it seems to be focused now on female politicians of the strictly Democratic stripe, the kind who wear pantsuits and congratulate themselves with awards. They're the Democrat-left establishment. They're the Planned Parenthood-approved sisterhood. The actresses the magazine focuses on are there solely based on their leftwing activism - Alyssa Milano and the #MeToo types, not people who've actually done something interesting in the acting trade. There was just one clothing spread and boy was it boring. In short, the magazine has degenerated into Democratic establishment politics, which is a stupid thing given that it advertises itself as about fashion and presumably, the cutting edge. Yes, Democratic women have some appeal to Millennials and leftists, and I have no doubt that women's magazines such as Glamour, Teen Vogue, and regular Vogue are stoking it, but in taking that route, I have a sense that Glamour is just a pathetic creature of this boring establishment scene.

They may gussy up assorted female pols in monocolored pantsuits with makeup and talk the wonders of Planned Parenthood, but such packaging it doesn't make these people truly glamorous. All it does is put lipstick on pigs.

No wonder the magazine is going downhill. It's turned itself into the quasi-glamorous propaganda arm of the Democratic Party, and cripes, is there anything less glamourous? After embracing Democrats, the magazine has failed to live up to its name.

Image credit: Screengrab from Glamour's Twitter site

Glamour magazine has decided to end its print version, heading to a web-only format, according to its parent company, Conde Nast.

In a story from Variety:

After nearly 80 years, the monthly print edition of Condé Nast’s Glamour women’s magazine is ending.

Glamour’s last regularly published print edition, the January 2019 issue, is scheduled to hit newsstands next week, the company announced Tuesday.

It’s another move by Condé Nast away from declining print businesses to pivot to a mostly digital future, a trend that has cut across the entire publishing biz. Glamour has a print circulation of about 2 million, but the brand reaches an audience of around 20 million online, according to the company.

Which is kind of the story of a lot of print media, with all its good and bad reasons. The magazine can't be doing well, deny it as they try to suggest in their statement to Variety.

But the lack of wellness of the magazine is hardly confined to the tech revolution's advances, or the preferences of the Millennials - have you taken a look at what Glamour is like these days?

It's actually pretty hideous. I did with the last issue, viewing it in the doctor's office, and boy did I put that one back on the stack instead of sneak it out in my purse. In the past, the magazine, formerly known as 'Glamour of Hollywood' was a great go-to place for stories about models, makeup, fashion, boyfriends and good girly stuff. One of my mother's favorite photos of me at age 7 was of how I used to lap up her copy of Glamour magazine, seated like a kid with my feet on the couch reading it like a kid reads a storybook.

Today, it's decided that Hollywood for Ugly People is better than actual glamour.

Seriously, it seems to be focused now on female politicians of the strictly Democratic stripe, the kind who wear pantsuits and congratulate themselves with awards. They're the Democrat-left establishment. They're the Planned Parenthood-approved sisterhood. The actresses the magazine focuses on are there solely based on their leftwing activism - Alyssa Milano and the #MeToo types, not people who've actually done something interesting in the acting trade. There was just one clothing spread and boy was it boring. In short, the magazine has degenerated into Democratic establishment politics, which is a stupid thing given that it advertises itself as about fashion and presumably, the cutting edge. Yes, Democratic women have some appeal to Millennials and leftists, and I have no doubt that women's magazines such as Glamour, Teen Vogue, and regular Vogue are stoking it, but in taking that route, I have a sense that Glamour is just a pathetic creature of this boring establishment scene.

They may gussy up assorted female pols in monocolored pantsuits with makeup and talk the wonders of Planned Parenthood, but such packaging it doesn't make these people truly glamorous. All it does is put lipstick on pigs.

No wonder the magazine is going downhill. It's turned itself into the quasi-glamorous propaganda arm of the Democratic Party, and cripes, is there anything less glamourous? After embracing Democrats, the magazine has failed to live up to its name.

Image credit: Screengrab from Glamour's Twitter site