Video above is of Self magazine Editor-in-Chief Lucy Danziger defending her decision to use a thinner, healthier looking photoshopped Kelly Clarkson on the cover a couple months ago. In my opinion her reasoning for using a touch-up photo of Kelly doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. If the issue is about Kelly being a confident woman because she’s healthy than why are you digitally slimming her down. But, while photoshopping has been a controversial issue with magazines for quite some time. Photoshopping wasn’t what made my head spin. It was Ms. Danziger saying that Self magazine’s stock and trade isn’t journalism. Maybe, I heard her wrong. Or maybe, she just couldn’t find the right words. Or maybe that’s exactly what she meant.
I would think when you’re the editor-in chief of a popular fitness magazine, journalism should still be important. It is not like Self is the National Enquirer where journalism is non-existent. Self is like most popular magazines that focuses less on traditional journalism and more on “inspiring and informing.” I myself read Cosmopolitan, not because of the magazine’s amazing journalistic stories, but just for the sheer enjoyment of reading the latest inane sex tip. So, is that what most consumer magazines are glossy how-to’s and gossip rags? Or is not “inspiring and informing” just another way to describe journalism?
What are your thoughts about Lucy Danziger’s comments? Are you just as confuse as me or do you have a better understanding of what she said? Does her comment make you look at magazines especially consumer magazines a different way?