Time out: Despite Time Inc.’s deep pockets, the magazine Suede is “on hiatus.” “Hiatus” (or, as we call it on the rexblog, “bye-atus”) can be loosely translated as a state of terminal vaporziness.
What caused Suede’s failure? Well, here’s a paragraph from an article posted tonight on Mediaweek.com that contains so much spin, I’m getting dizzy:
Advertisers, however, failed to embrace Suede,
arguing that it lacked the street cred of Vibe. But the other main
factor was the rise of Hispanic titles, which were luring big dollars.
Still, Vibe will give Suede’s readers another shot, having just spun
off Vibe Vixon.
arguing that it lacked the street cred of Vibe. But the other main
factor was the rise of Hispanic titles, which were luring big dollars.
Still, Vibe will give Suede’s readers another shot, having just spun
off Vibe Vixon.
So, there you have it: According to Media Week, the reason Suede failed
was Time Inc.’s lack of street cred and advertisers choosing to
advertise in hispanic titles rather than in a magazine for African
American women.
Can someone help me: I’m having difficulty determining if that analysis is merely offensive or, rather, is it blatantly racist?
And, who makes that stuff up?
Who makes it up? As The Church Lady http://snltranscripts.jt.org/87/87bchurchchat.phtml might have said (in far fewer words) … Could it be the same people who can call with certainty the reason why the stock market moved up or down significantly 5 minutes after it closes, but couldn’t see that coming the day before? Hmmm?
Or maybe they were reading this: http://www.medialifemagazine.com/news2003/aug03/aug04/1_mon/news2monday.html