Creatives taking back the fashion (magazine) industry?

[amsp]

I just got back from the magazine store and noticed a bunch of new fashion magazines, and when I looked at who was making these they were all run by photographers and stylists it seemed. Have we creatives finally had enough of being trampled on and being payed peanuts for the work we do while the editors pocket all the profits? In the same spirit I recently heard of this fashion editor getting canned for doing just that, he even had a page in the magazine where he pretty much bragged about all the ridiculously expensive things he had bought that month, it made me sick to my stomach. I for one hope this is truly what we are seeing, because I'm genuinely tired of douchebaggery in this business. Power needs get back in the hands of the ones who actually create the content.

[Rob C]

But power needs a power base. How many photographers are going to be able to float magazines? Several lone rangers have tried to do that and most have been burned pretty badly.

It takes a hell of a lot of money, very good connections; probably like running an art gallery, in fact. Bailey was involved in that sort of thing and so was Rankin; Newton contributed a lot to Nicole Wisniak's EGOÏSTE. NOTE: THIS LINK REMOVED BECAUSE MY COMPUTER JUST INFORMED ME IT IS DANGEROUS and there are several others I can no longer name because my memory seems more effed by the day - I just know they exist(ed?).

Perhaps an online magazine is possible if you have the time and the inclination, but that's not the same thing as seeing your work displayed in a news kiosk. About as thrilling as playing your jpegs on the tv.

Rob C

EDIT: SEE ABOVE BOLD CAPS

[fredjeang]

I think that it will be a matter of publicity space.
A web fashion magazine is a lot of work if done seriously, but in the end more managable than a traditional edition.

The inversors, and ads are actually very involved in the web media.

A serious web fashion magazine, runned by pro photographers is totally possible.

Web is very powerfull. It is currently more important than the TV.
It is not that unrealistic to think that in some years, the paper press will be decreasing seriously in favor of the digital medias.

the ROB's Mag is a good name, don't you imagine yourself running such a magazine?  
Surrownded like Charlie Angels by fashion beauties on a terrasse of your beautifull Baleare's coast...

[feppe]

I think that it will be a matter of publicity space.
A web fashion magazine is a lot of work if done seriously, but in the end more managable than a traditional edition.

The inversors, and ads are actually very involved in the web media.

A serious web fashion magazine, runned by pro photographers is totally possible.

Web is very powerfull. It is currently more important than the TV.
It is not that unrealistic to think that in some years, the paper press will be decreasing seriously in favor of the digital medias.

Sure it's possible, but profits or even financial sustainability are elusive for online magazines. Nobody has figured a way to monetize an online magazine, yet. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it's going to be extremely difficult and requires some killer content, and perhaps more importantly peole behind the scenes - and I'm not talking about creatives, here.

[fredjeang]

Sure it's possible, but profits or even financial sustainability are elusive for online magazines. Nobody has figured a way to monetize an online magazine, yet. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it's going to be extremely difficult and requires some killer content, and perhaps more importantly peole behind the scenes - and I'm not talking about creatives, here.

Yes, commercial staff will be the clew IMO.

[Rob C]

Sure it's possible, but profits or even financial sustainability are elusive for online magazines. Nobody has figured a way to monetize an online magazine, yet. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it's going to be extremely difficult and requires some killer content, and perhaps more importantly peole behind the scenes - and I'm not talking about creatives, here.

I have often wondered about that: I surf much more than is good for my veins and yet, with all that wasted time and DVT risk, I seldom see any of the advertising that supposedly appears on the internet. Either I am more skilled in the art of ignoring what I don't wish to see (my late alsabrador dog was like that: huge but always avoided seeing threats) than I had imagined or I have managed to set my computer to eliminate all that stuff. What advertising?

Rob C

[feppe]

I have often wondered about that: I surf much more than is good for my veins and yet, with all that wasted time and DVT risk, I seldom see any of the advertising that supposedly appears on the internet. Either I am more skilled in the art of ignoring what I don't wish to see (my late alsabrador dog was like that: huge but always avoided seeing threats) than I had imagined or I have managed to set my computer to eliminate all that stuff. What advertising?

Rob C

Your skills of repression are impressive  Those rare times I'm forced to surf without Adblock Plus (plugin for Firefox) I'm shocked at how many ads there are online - many sites have dedicated over 75% of screen estate for ads.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Power needs get back in the hands of the ones who actually create the content.

Sounds like workers self-management... there was a country once that pioneered the third economic system, i.e., neither (free-market) capitalism, nor (state-controlled) communism, but the workers self-management, where the means (and results) of production belong to those who actually use them. Neither the country, nor the system, exist today.

If "creatives" were so good at running business, wouldn't we lose a good "creative" in order to get a so-so (if at all) businessman as a result? There is a reason people do what they do best: "creatives" create and business people run business.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... I seldom see any of the advertising that supposedly appears on the internet...

I am with Rob on this one. I am eternally perplexed by Google's success (financial, not as a search engine), given that I never, ever clicked on anything remotely looking like a Google ad, as a matter of principle. I see it in the corner of my eye, but treat it like any other nuisance (e.g., ads during a movie - fast forward). However, I would often pick up my wife's magazines with the sole intent to look for beautiful photography used in ads. So, for me, ads in magazines, YES, on the internet, NO.

[fredjeang]

I am with Rob on this one. I am eternally perplexed by Google's success (financial, not as a search engine), given that I never, ever clicked on anything remotely looking like a Google ad, as a matter of principle. I see it in the corner of my eye, but treat it like any other nuisance (e.g., ads during a movie - fast forward). However, I would often pick up my wife's magazines with the sole intent to look for beautiful photography used in ads. So, for me, ads in magazines, YES, on the internet, NO.

I was perplex too. But one or 2 months ago, here in Spain, they announced that for the first time advertising investment on the web has overcome the Tv.
Brands invest more on the web now that they do on Tv.
I guess these guys are taking the web very very seriously.
It surprises me, but today, I went for a walk with my girlfriend in Madrid center and you just observe the people, listen to the music, enter in the bars, observing and observing...you might not click on the ads, but I'm sure many many do.
And it is not just about clicking.

[Rob C]

I was perplex too. But one or 2 months ago, here in Spain, they announced that for the first time advertising investment on the web has overcome the Tv.
Brands invest more on the web now that they do on Tv.
I guess these guys are taking the web very very seriously.
It surprises me, but today, I went for a walk with my girlfriend in Madrid center and you just observe the people, listen to the music, enter in the bars, observing and observing...you might not click on the ads, but I'm sure many many do.
And it is not just about clicking.

You mean the subliminal effect, then?

Well I guess that in my case it works against the advertisers if it works at all. As I don't remember any ads other than the annoying ones that flick on and off somewhere on the screen when I first open the internet - mainly cars - I have to think that internet advertising fails completely. In fact, it is a negative.

Slobodan's experience with his wife's magazines mirrors mine: before I went to work for myself I used to cut out those ads and stick them up on the studio walls of the place where I worked; not as an attempt to pretend the shots were mine, which would have made me look ridiculous, but just as decoration and in hope of creating some enthusiasm in the people who might come in. Even airports used to have beautiful still life shots of all those brandies, whiskies, bottles of perfume etc. etc. and it gave a kind of really international flavour to being in the airport, even if one was only taking a domestic hop.

Adverts were ART, damn it, not just dumb, flicking, rotating light shows. We have truly lost so much good street art this way.

Rob C

[Rob C]

But are these youngsters buying anything, which is the point of it for the advertisers?

Rob C

[fredjeang]

Check this: http://www.levi.com.hk/eng/release/index.html
This is interactive publicity, that is where they invest. Not so much the google clicks.

Humanity spend a lot of time in internet.

Car brands: build your car, choose your colors, the seats etc...all interactive, in real time.

This is another example: http://www.s.leica-camera.com/

How did I get there? Google.

[Rob C]

WARNING. DO NOT GO TO THE EGOISTE LINK POSTED EARLIER - MY COMPUTER NOW TELLS ME IT IS DANGEROUS.

Rob C

[Justan]

Sounds like workers self-management... there was a country once that pioneered the third economic system, i.e., neither (free-market) capitalism, nor (state-controlled) communism, but the workers self-management, where the means (and results) of production belong to those who actually use them. Neither the country, nor the system, exist today.

If "creatives" were so good at running business, wouldn't we lose a good "creative" in order to get a so-so (if at all) businessman as a result? There is a reason people do what they do best: "creatives" create and business people run business.

Fwiw there is a kind of cooperative known as a Mondragon cooperative that is close to what you describe. According to an article the spread between the highest wage paid for the executives and the wage paid to the folks who do the cleaning is said to range between 3:1 and 9:1. IIRC the biggest one of these is in Spain.