The New York Times
February 12, 1995
Business, p. 6.
[Excerpts]
For British Women's Magazines, Sex Is a Recipe for Success
By Nina Darnton
London, Feb. 12 -- A bunch of thirtysomething editors of
British women's magazines think they have discovered what
women want. The same thing men want, they seem to be
saying: sex, plenty of it and the tackier the better.
Publications that used to attract readers with recipes for
lemon meringue pie now reel them in with exposed flesh --
the same time-worn tabloid tactic that used to be the
province of men's magazines. After a flirtation with
articles aimed at women with broader interests, magazines
like Marie Claire, More! and Company have been reaching new
highs in circulation by publishing just about any article
with the word sex in it.
As a result, cover lines featuring the "s" word scream out
in fluorescent colors from London newsstands: "The Secrets
of Women who Adore Sex," "Future Sex and Shopping," "Sex
and the Psycho Girl" and "Suburban Porn Stars." That last
one, in the January issue of Company, came complete with
graphic photographs under the headline "Suburban Sex
Scandal: Group Sex With Strangers, Masturbation, Whipping;
It Could Be All Happening Next Door to You."
But in the last year the popular monthly has shown a
preference for sensationalistic articles. One issue ran a
sealed inner section showing rows of close-up pictures of
men's sexual organs. The point, according to the article,
was to educate women about male anatomy. Educational claims
were also made for January's suburban sex article, which
photographed and described in vivid detail -- employing an
impressive variety of four-letter words -- scenes of group
sex and sadomasochism being filmed for a pornographic
movie.
The February issue of Company published a box asking
readers whether subjects "that may sometimes be unsavory
but, nevertheless, like abortion, rape or abuse, are part
of today's world," belonged in the pages of women's
magazines. Mr. Mansfield said the magazine received about
200 letters in response, most of which supported coverage
of such subjects.
Mr. Mansfield, who said the company periodically conducted
market surveys to determine which subjects were of interest
to the magazine's readers, asserted that there was
widespread interest in stories about sex in the context of
relationships. He also cited research showing that young
women were less informed about sex than commonly assumed.
"We find that it's through magazines that young women seek
this information," Mr. Mansfield said.
Critics of what The Daily Telegraph calls the "sex-made"
trend among women's magazines contend that the goal is
increasing circulation, not education. "It's about selling
magazines," said Jane Proctor, editor of Tatler, another
women's monthly, which for the most part has steered clear
of the trend. "It's about editors trying to outdo each
other. The recession has hit everybody."
Stories on sex appear to be working like magic. The
circulation of Company has grown by 18,000 in the last
year, to 268,022 from 250,343 in 1993. Marie Claire, which
used to be aimed at women with more intellectual interests,
was amply rewarded for its decision about a year ago to
include sexier stories: its circulation rose from 313,866
in 1993 to 398,019 last year, a jump of 85,000.
"A lot of editors have noted that sex pretty rapidly puts
on sales," Ms. Kelsey said. "But it's not the only thing
that sells magazines. One of the most phenomenal success
stories is Good Housekeeping, which sells very traditional
values but in a kind of bright, up-to-date way."
As for the other magazines, Ms. Kelsey said: "I think that
in nearly every case, what some call sensationalist has
been explicit but acceptable. I would say, 'Why not?' "
An article in The Daily Telegraph said why not -- "The
result is degrading to women and ironically deserves all
the old charges of exploitation that used to be leveled at
girlie magazines for men."
Ms. Kelsey, while admitting that the Company article in
January "overstepped the mark," maintained that the
magazines were simply treating sex less reverently. "I
don't believe that women are titillated in the way men are
by these overt, sexy articles," she said.
Ms. Norwood of Company says it is the readers who decide
what is acceptable. "I think there is such thing as bad
taste," she said. "But I find it hard to define. If it will
offend the reader, it's bad taste."
The trend toward sexually oriented subject matter in
magazines parallels the recent growth of mainstream female
erotic literature in Britain. Little Brown recently
introduced a new imprint here -- but not in the United
States -- called X Libris, which includes four slim bright
pink volumes with titles like "Arousing Anna." They are all
written by, and for, women.
"We have to wake up to the fact that sex is here and people
are talking about it," Ms. Norwood said "and thank God they
are."
"I don't think there's anything wrong with a little
voyeurism," she added. "In small amounts."
END
February 12, 1995
Business, p. 6.
[Excerpts]
For British Women's Magazines, Sex Is a Recipe for Success
By Nina Darnton
London, Feb. 12 -- A bunch of thirtysomething editors of
British women's magazines think they have discovered what
women want. The same thing men want, they seem to be
saying: sex, plenty of it and the tackier the better.
Publications that used to attract readers with recipes for
lemon meringue pie now reel them in with exposed flesh --
the same time-worn tabloid tactic that used to be the
province of men's magazines. After a flirtation with
articles aimed at women with broader interests, magazines
like Marie Claire, More! and Company have been reaching new
highs in circulation by publishing just about any article
with the word sex in it.
As a result, cover lines featuring the "s" word scream out
in fluorescent colors from London newsstands: "The Secrets
of Women who Adore Sex," "Future Sex and Shopping," "Sex
and the Psycho Girl" and "Suburban Porn Stars." That last
one, in the January issue of Company, came complete with
graphic photographs under the headline "Suburban Sex
Scandal: Group Sex With Strangers, Masturbation, Whipping;
It Could Be All Happening Next Door to You."
But in the last year the popular monthly has shown a
preference for sensationalistic articles. One issue ran a
sealed inner section showing rows of close-up pictures of
men's sexual organs. The point, according to the article,
was to educate women about male anatomy. Educational claims
were also made for January's suburban sex article, which
photographed and described in vivid detail -- employing an
impressive variety of four-letter words -- scenes of group
sex and sadomasochism being filmed for a pornographic
movie.
The February issue of Company published a box asking
readers whether subjects "that may sometimes be unsavory
but, nevertheless, like abortion, rape or abuse, are part
of today's world," belonged in the pages of women's
magazines. Mr. Mansfield said the magazine received about
200 letters in response, most of which supported coverage
of such subjects.
Mr. Mansfield, who said the company periodically conducted
market surveys to determine which subjects were of interest
to the magazine's readers, asserted that there was
widespread interest in stories about sex in the context of
relationships. He also cited research showing that young
women were less informed about sex than commonly assumed.
"We find that it's through magazines that young women seek
this information," Mr. Mansfield said.
Critics of what The Daily Telegraph calls the "sex-made"
trend among women's magazines contend that the goal is
increasing circulation, not education. "It's about selling
magazines," said Jane Proctor, editor of Tatler, another
women's monthly, which for the most part has steered clear
of the trend. "It's about editors trying to outdo each
other. The recession has hit everybody."
Stories on sex appear to be working like magic. The
circulation of Company has grown by 18,000 in the last
year, to 268,022 from 250,343 in 1993. Marie Claire, which
used to be aimed at women with more intellectual interests,
was amply rewarded for its decision about a year ago to
include sexier stories: its circulation rose from 313,866
in 1993 to 398,019 last year, a jump of 85,000.
"A lot of editors have noted that sex pretty rapidly puts
on sales," Ms. Kelsey said. "But it's not the only thing
that sells magazines. One of the most phenomenal success
stories is Good Housekeeping, which sells very traditional
values but in a kind of bright, up-to-date way."
As for the other magazines, Ms. Kelsey said: "I think that
in nearly every case, what some call sensationalist has
been explicit but acceptable. I would say, 'Why not?' "
An article in The Daily Telegraph said why not -- "The
result is degrading to women and ironically deserves all
the old charges of exploitation that used to be leveled at
girlie magazines for men."
Ms. Kelsey, while admitting that the Company article in
January "overstepped the mark," maintained that the
magazines were simply treating sex less reverently. "I
don't believe that women are titillated in the way men are
by these overt, sexy articles," she said.
Ms. Norwood of Company says it is the readers who decide
what is acceptable. "I think there is such thing as bad
taste," she said. "But I find it hard to define. If it will
offend the reader, it's bad taste."
The trend toward sexually oriented subject matter in
magazines parallels the recent growth of mainstream female
erotic literature in Britain. Little Brown recently
introduced a new imprint here -- but not in the United
States -- called X Libris, which includes four slim bright
pink volumes with titles like "Arousing Anna." They are all
written by, and for, women.
"We have to wake up to the fact that sex is here and people
are talking about it," Ms. Norwood said "and thank God they
are."
"I don't think there's anything wrong with a little
voyeurism," she added. "In small amounts."
END