Why “New” Magazines Will Be Future’s Key
More quarantine thoughts
2 weeks ago, I chatted with six industry friends about how Covid-19’s changing media. At that time, I was experiencing difficulty applying for jobs (great timing by the way), which is why I vividly remember asking them: Is the industry sincerely prepared for significant change or simply scrambling to old normal? By old normal, I mean, and to quote my most recent interview with an ex-designer for a Singapore blogshop as metaphor: “hiding imperfections with styling”. I was skeptical of re-entering a fashion/media industry filled with loopholes and decision makers who’d never fix them.
My friends’ answers were far-ranging. Some believed restructuring was inevitable, others argued that Singaporeans were too obstinate and the industry was overpopulated with fossils for any real change to happen. By fashion editor and new friend Niki Bruce’s assessment, for example, print has been “dead” for years.
In response to severe disruption, other content platforms have also become even more prolific than ever. My web browser has been choked with tabs for weeks, I’m trying to stay updated with the latest news and post-quarantine predictions. In short:
Industry buzzwords are finally being taken seriously. Sustainability*, authenticity, innovation, diversity, among others. No one has a choice, old normal doesn’t exist anymore. Those who prioritise instant returns will fizzle out, while those who are committed to their audiences will come out winners.
My thought frame has shifted from the perspective of the industry to the consumer. Just take magazines: it’s not so much whether legacy titles are willing to change, but whether consumers still feel like they need to buy into brand values to validate themselves and others. Last year, Vogue Runway started charging brands if they wanted their collections to be featured on their platform. This rollout was peak-gross on top of an editorial landscape that had already been tarnished by the:
- Decline of print and wilful ignorance of editors who held on to the reverence of producing old media in old ways
- Lack of innovation with telling digital stories and superficial acquisition of new-gen audiences via numbers-driven content
- Inability to monetise digital content giving way to ad-driven fashion spreads and opinion pieces (you could never earnestly criticise a brand who pays), which perpetuated a vicious cycle of consumers’ mistrust
- Uptick in amateur platforms run by new-gen creatives, including influencers, which blurred the line between thoughtful fashion discourse and straight-up bullshit (if only I could name names)
Bluntly, most fashion magazine stories have devolved from egalitarian criticism, to what-I-call “description of clothes”, to blatantly glorified ghostwriters for luxury brands. Imagine being paid to go to a movie, hating it, and being forced to say you love it so that other people can watch it and hate it too. I don’t have to imagine.
That’s not to say I don’t believe in compromise or collaboration. It’s exactly because I believe in them that I’m so upset the scale has been so disproportionately misbalanced. The best way I know how to counteract it now is to grow my independent voice, one hopefully of reason and reassurance. Apart from this blog, I’ve also been fortunate to have been roped in by a dream-of-an editor from Buro Singapore to contribute stories for them. Read 7 independent designers you should support now.
More than ever, I’ve been turning to my favourite magazines (do we even call them that today?) for a sense of what’s/what’s to-be happening. The adaptability of the most innovative content platforms to Covid-19 have shown me the extent which insightful stories can reclaim uncertainty and be a force for productive good. Considering the frivolous and serious in fashion not just today, but every day, is a great way to start thinking about change. Content platforms cannot be run singularly off manufactured virality.
Actionable: a new normal will address the flawed relationship between commerce and creativity. One should not be at the mercy of, much less cancel out completely, the other. The most effective creatives will speak to the individual and 100,000 people at the same time, while the most astute executives will have the foresight to evaluate that money cannot be made off the backs of dissatisfied creatives.
What’s scarier than wanting to change, is realising that it’s too late to.
