Hey, ho! We're not
called "Glamour" for nothing
From the blog Gawker (thanks to Barb Adamski for the tip):
British Glamour editor Jo Elvin was shocked -- shocked! -- to learn that for an upcoming piece about women who had lost their husbands in Iraq or Afghanistan, a freelancer named Victoria Lambert sent an email to members of Military Families Against the War looking for "photogenic" case studies. The email read: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! [...] 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 members refused Glamour's request; a spokesperson from the organization noted, "We felt the 'hey ho' bit crossed the line of good taste."
posted by D. B. Scott at
11:15 am
3 Comments:
Oh my god! That sounds so "The Devil wears Prada." Tacky!
Ok, but the really poor-taste bit is the "a big ask" phraselet.
For all you aspiring MBAers, kindly remember that many words have already been invented to cover most daily requirements.
In this case, the noun in question is "request".
Hidey-ho!
in magazines, we're always looking for the photogenic subject. fact is, people are more likely to read a story if the accompanying photos are attractive. of course glamour -- or any magazine -- would want good-looking folks. what's most egregious is not the content of the request, but the language and tone.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home