Magazine requested 'photogenic' war widows

The editor of Glamour magazine has apologised after a reporter issued an appeal for "photogenic" modern war widows.

Jo Elvin said she was "outraged and sorry" that Military Families Against the War had been sent an e-mail asking if they could provide case-studies of women, aged between 30 and 38, whose husbands had been killed in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The e-mail, sent by a freelance reporter, Victoria Lambert, commissioned to write a feature, asks MFAW to arrange interviews, provided the women are attractive enough. "Glamour is very looks-conscious so, at the risk of sounding ridiculous, they need to be photogenic, or at least comfortable in front of a camera!" it read. "The editor likes to approve each case history, so when I send her a short bio ("X is aged X and lost her husband X in the war X") she likes to see a jpeg pic too. I know this is a big ask, but it's something she demands! Hey ho!"

MFAW refused to co-operate. "We are sad as much as angry about it," a spokesperson said.

http://news.independent.co.uk/media/article1696155.ece

nt

Or maybe BETTER, a corpse being eaten by a dog

I really did. I wouldn't put it past them.

I have to say that I would be very surprised if they did that. Now if it was a "Warrior Women of the US Marines" pictoral - I could see that. But they would ask for women who were interested in posing, and be upfront about it. Playboy is very pro-civil liberties, particularly for women.

somehow I don't think Glamour was planning to do that.

The ugly have no feelings.

This culture equates "beautiful" with "worthwhile" and "good" to an extreme degree. At least, I hope it is the culture and not something hard-wired in human neur ology that does this.

Tucker (not beautiful)

it is hard-wired. It's the "mate selection" subconscious part.

Look at Jonbenet! If she had been ugly she would have been ignored.

Ugly or handsome murders get lots of press too. I'm not proud of this but it is a provable fact although I'm not the one to do it.

You nailed them. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

a magazine read by pretty people and they can't be bothered to hear of the sadness of the un-beautiful.

The magazine was backing down because they were open to public disapproval and ridicule. On the other hand, the reporter sounds like she was zonked out on drugs. "This is a big ask. . . Hey ho!"
is damned wiseass, flip language to use when communicating with a group of military family war protestors. What will be the reporter's formal apology, "Big whoops, my bad!" What age is she, 12?

Unbelievable. :(

Any competent feature writer knows you get your sources lined up before you make your pitch to the editor.

Did the article specify this? Don't recall.

Glamour is mostly fluff -- makeup and fashion and celebrity stuff. But every issue also has an article or two on something serious and important, like political issues, global women's rights, environmental stuff.

It isn't Vanity Fair, but it isn't Cosmo or Vogue, either. It's a good read.

I know the woman was getting her marching orders from above. I like Glamour myself, but that doesn't mean they'd never ask for a good-looking widow.

Me, all I have to go on from the story is the text of the freelancer's email. Since that demonstrates that she's a tactless fool, I'll continue to believe what I believe.

There were better ways to phrase her request -- although, frankly, I don't know how you would frame a request like that and not make it sound insulting.

One thing you have to understand about freelance writers, when we work with major pubs like Glamour, the job always comes with marching orders. Pubs like Glamour pay very well, and they're precise about what they want and what they don't want. Often there is a contract involved. The writer is almost always involved with the visuals to some degree. And, if you want to work for them again, you do what the editor tells you. (Although I doubt with the bad publicity this has gotten them, she'll be working for Glamour again any time soon.)

Wasn't trying to burst your bubble about Glamour; I like them, too. But mags are a business, just like any other. And no magazine is immune to doing something that may seem a little crass to outsiders. Also, having been an editor myself, you're often under pressure from the business side, namely the publisher, to "make things happen" a certain way. Certain types of pictures. Certain types of people. Mind you, these are people who know nothing about photography, writing or journalism. But they THINK they do. Everyone thinks they do, I'm starting to find out.

I remember talking to someone who was interviewed and photographed for a Newsweek article. He recalled his frustration in dealing with some editor, who insisted that a "walking on the beach" article would be nice. Never mind that the story was about the fact that he and other young urban pioneers were bringing an inner-city neighborhood back from the dead. She wanted a walk on the beach. To their credit, someone on staff intervened and the story got an urban-style picture.

It's a sad fact of life that people with no brains get jobs with major print media, the kind that have some influence on society and culture.

It's a difficult spot for a reporter, and this one at least admits that it sounds "ridiculous," so she may not have wanted to follow these marching orders. Still, her tone is rather flippant.

The real problem here is with the editorial policy, as far as I'm concerned; their response rings pretty damn hollow to me. Why should it matter to have a "photogenic" subject (whatever that means) for the one serious news article in the mag?

As a writer myself there's almost nothing that bothers me more than when editors manufacture storyline angles that just don't make sense and are unnecessary.

Nice thing about flying solo, you only have to deal with that stuff on a limited basis.
When I was still on-staff -- I had every psychosomatic illness known to man!

who were wounded in Iraq and didn't really shrink from showing scar tissue.

Maybe it was a different editor, but from what I've read so far, Glamour seemed remarkably tactful in handling war related issues.

And at least they're talking about the war in the first place unlike so much of la-de-da life goes on American pop culture.

I have always hated this type of shallow attitude.

Land of the shallow and home of the morans!

This isn't the least bit surprising, even in this day and age. Especially in this day and age, when people spend millions and put themselves through dangerous surgery to hang onto the illusion of youth.

but really this is welcome to the UK (or Airstrip 1), as this happened over here.

Glamour Magazine is in New York.

Edited - you are correct!

Glamor magazine doesn't want unglamorous widows.

All across America in every mall, there used to be a place called "Glamor Shots" where unglamorous people could go and become "Glamorous" for however long it took to be photographed. I never participated in this phenomenon but several of my family members went down there got plastered in make up, put on whatever piece of wardrobe they liked and wham insto-presto they were transformed into "glamorous" people.

I think Glamor magazine should do a feature of as many war widows as possible. They could be made to appear "glamorous" if they so choosed......

Don't you think people who saw this article would realize that not all "glamorous" people have lost loved ones due to this obscene illegal war?

I find out that people who are considered "un photogenic" do not grieve. Their hearts are not broken because the husband they loved was killed. Why even bother with getting their feelings, or spotlighting them in a ghoulish magazine article when it's better to use younger, and more attractive widows?

We have truly sunk to the depths of shallowness and cruelty, if we don't want our tender hearts burdened with the misery of the unattractive. This sounds like something Barbara Bush would say. A family is torn apart when a husband and father dies, and to the man who gave his life, his wife, and children, were one of the reasons he signed up, and fought, to make the world a safer place for them.

We know that he was misled, but that doesn't detract from his sacrifice, and his widow faces years of loneliness, and heartache. So keep it up, you shallow minded people who live for the 15 minutes of fame, or the sound byte that you think you deserve.

Let the rest of us, the liberal community, mourn each and every death, regardless of what the ones who gave up their lives thinking they were protecting us. For the rest of you, the Bushbots, the shallow, the cruel, go on and demand that widows must meet certain standards before she is worthy to portray. In the meantime, my liberal heart goes out to each and every one of them, without knowing, or caring, what they look like.

We all bleed red blood, and we all grieve when a loved one is taken from us. Some of us handle the grief with compassion, and some are so shallow and vapid that they will insist on physical standards before their compassion will stretch to extend their love and prayers to everyone.

:cry:

"We all bleed red blood, and we all grieve when a loved one is taken from us. Some of us handle the grief with compassion, and some are so shallow and vapid that they will insist on physical standards before their compassion will stretch to extend their love and prayers to everyone."

Are those with compassion so rare anymore? Are most people so shallow?

Knowing there are those like you, et al, in the world helps me to be able to hold onto hope.

Thank you. :hi:

I feel the same. DU has kept me semi-sane, at least, but that article was so repulsive, and hurtful, that I had to say something. I ask myself the same questions, are most people that shallow? I am moved to tears at the harm 6 years of Republican rule has done to this country.

Beauty is in the heart, and soul. Some of us can be blinded by the inner beauty of others, and some, like Republicans, are blind to the beauty within. I would rather be blinded by the purity and beauty of a loving soul, and yes, we will hold onto hope. :hug:

astonishing to me. Unfortunately it succeeded in 4 of my 5 sisters. It is heartbreaking to try to carry on an intelligent conversation with one, all that matters to them is how things look, not truth.

I feel it has been an intentional effort of the controlled media to create such a shallow atmosphere. Smoke and mirrors.

Here's to keeping hope alive! :toast::hug:

I have a cousin not quite a year younger than me, and every time I see her, I feel such love, and happiness, and I feel her inner goodness. The world would not think her beautiful. She is terribly overweight, but as long as she is healthy, that's all I care about.

When she visits, we are transported back to our childhood, and share memories of our beloved grandmother, who would very likely be dismissed by shallow people because of the lines and wrinkles in her face. To my cousin and me, she was the most beautiful person in the world.

She comes over for visits when other things get too much for her. We welcome her in, close the door, and I was only half kidding when I told my husband to go let the air out of her tires, so that she would have to stay. She knows that she can call on me, any time of the night or day, and I will be there for her. I could never begin to describe the inner beauty that she has. I love her with all my heart.

It's sad to me that some would only see her size, and then not think her worthy of a second glance. I have seen people's reaction to others who would not win the kind of beauty contests we hold, but if ever a contest is to measure the inner beauty of the soul, my cousin would win with absolutely no competition.

That's why I hate to see people hung up on looks, or money, or any of those other external measurements which mean nothing, when the time comes to weigh the good or the bad in a person. To me, it's the same thing..."make sure they're photogenic". What a shallow, insipid view. I almost feel sorry for people who measure other people's worth by how they look. Almost. Then I think about the hurt and the pain that they cause others, and my heart hardens. I hope that you and your one sister who is not shallow stay close.

Remember, the two of you are worth more than hundreds of people like your other sisters. What a shame, that they remain blind.

a :hug: from me. Souls such as hers are becoming rare.

Your kind words are appreciated.

Namaste

Thank you, vickiss, for saying that. It would be better for the whole world if we could all look at WHO a person is, rather than how they look. I ran across an old photo that I am copying and giving to her. It's going to be captioned, "This is how long we've been together". In the photo, her mother is pregnant with her, and is walking with the 10 month old me.

We have been best friends that long, and I have enjoyed her inner beauty that long. I pity the people who can't really see a person because they are used to only seeing the physical aspects. I am blessed, because I know one of the most beautiful people in the world. Passing on hugs to others is one of my greatest joys in life. Since I know how she would react, I am taking the liberty of sending one back to you.:hug:

You have touched me and many others.

I hope you'll submit it when the story hits the US papers. :yourock:

bodied ones with wisful looks and pouty lips!" Fucking nuts.

and a real tear-jerker, too. What a great way to sell magazines. Stupid fucking bitch.

this is awful, don't get me wrong, but it doesn't shock me.

That we again read about this in a UK publication. Also, note that the idiot freelancer knows what poor form it is because she blames the photogenic request on the editor. And I've no doubt whatsoever that indeed the editor indeed dictates the nature of the photographs.

But you see, these people are just a cog in the mass media that is designed to make everyone in America feel inadequate and just not good enough. That's what American media is all about: it's a 24-hour a day machine pumping out images that people cannot live up to. Not even the people in the images can live up to it because they are airbrushed and, btw, starving.

If we feel inadequate, we buy. The solution, the quick fix, is at the cosmetics counter or the car dealership.

And in this instance, not even the tragedy of war widows will interfere with "the program." "The program" must go on.




Cher

Only I call the program "the matrix".same thing,really.

a black miniskirt. Can't have these war widows looking like they are not on the prowl after the funeral."
:sarcasm: (as if that was needed)

Our media are pure GARBAGE.

country has become. From juicy hamburger commercials to presidental photo ops. From false boobs to false ideals. False illusions.

this whole country has gone from substance to public relations and spin. Glamour simply reflects our leaders in DC.