Thursday, 24 November 2011

Dear More!

This week, I decided after much ranting on about More! magazine, see previous blog post, I would email them direct about a few issues that I have with the magazine[I really should research other magazines I know]. After attempting to email the editor yesterday, which ended up being an invalid email address,I emailed all email addresses possible,8, on their contact page, so at least someone would recieve my email. And within a few hours this afternoon I got a response.
The two questions I asked were:

Q1: Would More! ever consider doing a whole magazine featuring models of the natural average size [14/16]? [excluding adverts]
Q2: Is More! unable to accept the beauty of a natural body without glamourising it with sex? Would you be willing to a feature on plus-size models without the mention of men, and focus on the struggles of dieting, accepting your body? Women struggle with body anxieties on a daily basis, often struggling for years to find confidence with their bodies.

The email had obviously been passed onto someone relevant, Louise IT Purchasing, and this is what she had to say:

'Thanks for your email. In response, we'd like to say firstly that on our fashion pages, we use professional models from national agencies, as do all other media. Secondly, we feature real girls with real bodies as part of our remit, and have always had a positive response from people when we do so. Every case study we feature has volunteered to take part and is well aware of the context of the feature. Finally, more! has been around for 25 years and has always been about men, sex and relationships. I hope this answers your questions.'

A short answer and covers what I asked but they obviously have passed the buck onto the fashion agencies regarding the models. So is it the modeling agencies that are making us self concious as they fail to hire or encourage the use of bigger models? In a previous blog post, I spoke about Mark Fast and his use of size 14 models on the cat walk, and maybe it is the push of using models on the cat walk that will see the rise of regular models in our magazines? Who do we blame? Where does the problem start?
 Why can't these companies provide a choice of different sized models or why don't the magazines only enforce the use of average sized models? Is it ovbiously too much a risk for a magazine to break the trend, like Mark Fast did, and set a good example.

No comments:

Post a Comment