iPad vs Print

I wanted to look closer at the Vogue tablet app but since I don't have a tablet and the friends who do , lost theirs or they got stolen, I did the next best thing and tried to find the introduction and overview of the app on Youtube.  I also wanted to compare it to the print version of the magazine and see how is the digitisation improving or downgrading the print versions of the same issue.

I did find a few videos remotely what I was looking for, even though too short.

The video that I want to share is like a introduction to the 2011 December issue digital version.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goJX-HefCBk

The magazine production, has according to McLuhan and Powers (1989) been transformed by colour television. The emergence of glossy covers, colour pictures and more user-friendly layouts has come about as the medium of magazines production has responded to technological developments in television (Stevenson, N. (2002) Understanding Media Culture London: Sage). I want to explore if there is any truth behind this quote and is it relevant now days.

Reason why I chose it, is because I actually have a print version of this issue. The obvious difference between the issues is that readers can't press on anything in the print issue. Personally this quality is not something that I am very fond of and perhaps is the reason why I prefer print copies but for a lot of the people of this modern age this press on everything quality makes the issue more interesting and perhaps more interactive.

Here is an example of what I was talking about. On that page there is a play button that the readers could press and a video from the photoshoot would open, revealing some scenes and shots that were not included in the magazine.

As you can see below in the print version the same page looks different and there is a limited amount of pictures that could have been included.

I found it very interesting how the Vogue App gives you the possibility to watch videos with fashion shows and  interviews with designers, models and fashionistas. While you are reading an article you can press on some of the images which will turn into a video with the interview or a fashion show so you don't have to go online or to press a link that will take you to another page to watch them. The videos are part of the digital issue. That gives the readers easier access to the information that the publishers want to share.

As it can be seen the print version is not that much different in terms of content but obviously there are no videos there and its seems that the same article on iPad is one page while the print version takes up  3 pages. If the digital issue would have been printed it would most possibly  be thinner but on larger paper.

Another fascinating thing about  the digital issue of Vogue is that the some of the images are moving. I don't mean like videos but actual images are rotating or jumping up and down.

This is the best example of what I am talking about, if you watch the video posted above then wait until 0:17 and you will see the moving images.

Of course its always more interesting when images are moving and that will actually attract the readers attention to that specific item which is a good marketing strategy, especially because its an article about Christmas gifts (you can see that not all of the images are moving, so the editors are subtly showing their preference to some items rather then all of them).

There is a question that comes to mind when looking at all of these moving images - Is our society becoming stupid?

Are we living in a time when to attract readers print media needs to have flashy images? I personally feel that a lot of people in this Century are like toddlers who need colorfoul pictures in their books, just so to keep their entertained. I understand that my main focus is Vogue and its digital issue which need to be different from the print issue and that is how editors and developers made it different and how they market products but it just makes you think about our society.

As said before the content is the same n the print media, just the images are not moving.



Digital issue also allows you to see behind the scenes of the photoshoots (that you can find on Vogue webiste). For some of the readers this little extra might make the photoshoot even more interesting then before.

 

So the digitalisation hasn't changed the print issue too radically. Yes, videos were added, images are now moving and the layout is a bit different and pages are not longer, but so far that's about it. I have posted about the future of Vogue in the digital age were students from Sweden made a video about how in the near future people will be able to just scan the items in magazines, with a smartphone, which will forward them to the website if the items brand where it will be possible to purchase the item but at the moment it is not possible.

The digital issues are perhaps more entertaining but that about it. I still prefer the print copy over the digital one but that is perhaps because I wasn't born in the digital age, not everyone had computers or mobile phones when I grew up. So maybe I'm just being sceptical about it.
I found that the quote mentioned in the beginning is actually very relevant to the Vogue app. The quote talked about how TV is changing magazines and from the example above that is clearly seen. Magazines are becoming more image focused and the digital issues include videos now. Perhaps the future of magazines lies in TV, who knows...

In any case the conclusion is that the digital issue doesn't differ that much from the print media but for publications its essential to have an App in this modern age.

Hot from the press

On my way home the other day I was reading the Evening Standard were there was an article about the print media and advertisement and the main focus of that article  was Vogue.

It was mentioned that the latest issue of Vogue :

is bigger then the previous one and all because of the advertisement in it. According  to the Vogue publishing director Stephen Quinn the display ad revenue rose 6% in 2012.

The main point of this article is that the print media is not dying and that digitisation is unavoidable but the print will always be relevant.

Here are some highlights from the article :

• " Consumers might be flocking online and on mobile - every self-respecting mag has an iPad app - but print is hard to beat when it comes to creating a tactile, engrossing experience."
• "Research called "Magonomics" claims that consumers feel more favourable towards print advertising than TV or the internet - there are higher "bonding scores", apparently. "
• "Quinn says advertisers are only interested in a few prime print titles. Even Vogue, a marketleader, has seen its 200,000 -plus print circulation fall by about 2% in the past 12 months. "
• "Part of the reason is that advertisers can now produce their own editorial content, from websites and online films to iPad apps and even print magazines."

So it seems that I am not the only one who thinks that print media will not disappear any time soon. Interestingly enough this article is showing the close relationship between print media and advertisement and how one affects the other. In any case this article only proves that print media will be around for quite some time.

Is Vogue a brand?

This is a question that has popped up into my head a couple of times since I started this blog. So I looked up the definition of the word "Brand".

1. (Business / Marketing) a particular product or a characteristic that serves to identify a particular product

2. (Business / Marketing) a trade name or trademark

(http://www.thefreedictionary.com/brand)

My favourite definition was :

"A brand is a product, service, or concept that is publicly distinguished from other products, services, or concepts so that it can be easily communicated and usually marketed. A brand name is the name of the distinctive product, service, or concept. Branding is the process of creating and disseminating the brand name. Branding can be applied to the entire corporate identity as well as to individual product and service names."

(http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/brand)

Reading these definitions you could say that Vogue is a brand. This question has been in my head because I tried to think of how Vogue has changed because of the digital age and this question was always the first to come to my mind. 

First of all Vogue is a fashion magazine, always has been.

But now there is so much more to it. There are the social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and Pintrest that help us get closer to the idea of Vogue and that give us insight into the amazing lives of Vogue girls.

Now there is also Vogue TV - http://www.vogue.co.uk/video/ 

Of course it's only online but who knows, perhaps its a start for an actual TV channel.

They also have a youtube channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/voguetv 

But that's not all, interestingly enough Vogue has an eyewear brand called Vogue - http://www.vogue-eyewear.com/international/

In recent years Vogue has organised a very popular event called Vogue Fashion Night Out -  

http://fashionsnightout.com/ 

Its an event where shops, mostly luxury, are open longer and they offer some kind of entertainment like DJ's, food, drinks and celebrity appearances - also discounts and limited addition items.  Since the launch of this event in 2009 it has become very popular in the big fashion capitals all over the world. The main reason for this was to boost retail sales but it has become a part of Vogue image.

Looking at all of this it is difficult to argue that Vogue is not a brand - not only its selling us products but also experience and a lifestyle.

Vogue would never have evolved into a brand so quickly if it wasn't for the digital revolution. The information now travels much faster and you don't have to wait a month to get some fashion news from Vogue. They can promote their events and products more effectively because of social media. Now their promotion campaign is much more cheaper, they just post something online and usually it gets the attention that they need.

Vogue Fashion Night Out probably wouldn't have been such a success if it wasn't for all of the social media promotion and later digital media coverage straight after the event has happened, maybe even during the event.

Now when we talk about Vogue we don't only think in terms of the magazine but also in terms of glamour, luxury and going out to posh places.

The point of this blog was that Vogue has become a brand because of the digital age, if the digital revolution didn't occur then Vogue would probably still be just a magazine and its transition from that to a brand would have taken a lot more time then it did.

Vogue Readership/Circulation

So for a long time I thought to do a post about Vogue readership and circulation figures. Wouldn't it be interesting how the figures have dropped or risen with the digital age? 

Perhaps its my inner geek talking but I found it very fascinating idea. The initial idea was to compare the readership and circulation figures from the 1960's or 1970's with today's figures. As it turned out it was hard to obtain figures that were older then 3 years. I failed in that searched but I did find figures from 2006 when the iPad was still not released and Twitter didn't exist and Facebook was something that mainly college students used. My main goal will be the circulation figures since there is more information on that. 

.

So these are the figures from 2006 (Vogue is outlined with red brackets). It can be seen that already then, the numbers were rising. One of the reason was perhaps the Vogues Official Website that boosted its popularity or perhaps that it was the golden time after the 90's and at that time the economy was growing and there were no signs of recession. 

These are the circulation figures of 2012 (January - June). It can be seen that the figures have gone down but on the other hand there are the digital circulation figures. Honestly I don't understand the digital circulation figures because I believe its hard to track. One person has the app and that's it. How can anyone find out how many people read that digital copy. 

The low figures could be blamed on the economy. As we all know the economy is in a bad place right now, so some people might choose to cut down on magazines. There is also the chance that the figures are lower then in 2006 because of the digital age. People are always talking bout how the print media might become extinct because of the digital revolution. The editors try to re-assure us that the print versions of their publications will always exist but the figures are painting a gloomy picture. Perhaps it is because the magazines are still trying to adjust to the digital age and all of the social,- and information platforms that have been created in the process. 

But at least Vogue is still going strong compared to some other fashion magazines. 

In terms of fashion titles, British Vogue fell 0.2 percent in the six months to December, compared to the same period last year, to 210,806, while Hearst’s Elle declined 2.7 percent to 195,020 year-on-year.

(Source: http://www.wwd.com/media-news/fashion-memopad/uk-titles-post-slow-growing-abcs-5704950) 

As you can see there other factors that might have influenced the readership/circulation figures. I believe it a bit hard to correctly analyse the figures because of those factors and we just need to wait for the economy to start improving and the magazines to figure out their place in the digital age and only then could we look at the figures and have a correct portrait of the situation. Until then we can only wait and hope that print copies of magazines will still have  the same relevance as they do now.

Trouble in Paradise

So far I have tried to show how Vogue is adapting to the new Digital Age. My main point was that the magazine is successful at adapting and perhaps even one step ahead of other fashion magazines.

Of course there will be someone who will disagree with me, so I tried to find opinions that contradict mine. I found these to articles that I want to share with you.

Has Vogue Been A Little Slow On The Digital Uptake?

by Contributor on October 16, 2012

Read more at http://www.fashionotes.com/content/2012/10/has-vogue-been-a-little-slow-on-the-digital-uptake/#yy213gcfCqpoUUDl.99 

Vogue is a fashion magazine. But, its not just any fashion magazine, it’s the biggest fashion magazine in the world. In fact, it’s much more than that; Vogue is not merely a magazine, which reports on the trends of the day, it defines them. If your shoes aren’t in Vogue, they just aren’t in. You might expect a magazine which has made its fortune keeping abreast of trends so well to be the first publisher to take to digital media, but not so. In fact, Vogue has been surprisingly slow on the uptake – so much so, I was beginning to think that by the time Vogue got into digital platforms, digital platforms would no longer be in Vogue.

In all seriousness though, Vogue has now managed to launch some apps, after years of prevarication. Their iPad app came out around a year after the iPad “Got Big,” and that certainly seemed like long enough at the time. The 52-year-old editor of British Vogue, Alexandra Shulman, has fully admitted to being a ‘neophyte’ when it comes to technology in an interview with the Telegraph.

“It has been much more work and much more complex to build and create it and work out what we were doing than I expected,” Shulman told the paper.

No surprises there; the senior editors who run Vogue publications clearly aren’t au fait with modern gadgets – and that’s OK.

But then, they did hire some top-notch designers and developers with the aim of creating a sleek and stylish app, which would represent Vogue’s ideals in digital space. Elegance, modernity, style, surely that’s what you would expect when you load up the Vogue app on your iPad? Unfortunately, it’s not what you get. It’s full of lush, beautiful photographs of women in sweeping dresses taken by Mario Testino, Peruvian fashion photographer. When you make an app that relies on massively detailed images for every page, what do you think’s going to happen? The app is ridiculously slow; I could make an award-winning dress in the time it takes to load a page, never mind downloading.

Photo By Mario Testino

This in itself is not a disaster; apps go through many versions before they’re perfected and Vogue is no different. Nobody gets it right first time, it must be said. But, if Vogue had actually joined the smartphone and tablet revolution at the outset, rather than halfway through, they could have long since resolved these issues. As it is, they’re simply blundering along, hoping that a sub-standard app will keep the masses happy. Maybe there’s a point to it all. Perhaps pixels will never be as beautiful as ink and apps simply aren’t the right platform for Vogue to waste too much time on. But then, digital media really is in Vogue at the moment, isn’t it? And, nobody’s asking Vogue whether or not they should buy a smartphone.

Most of the time Vogue dictates trends. In the world of digital publishing however, it’s still playing catch-up.

By Simon Drew,  writer for UK phone comparison service Best Mobile Contracts

Read more at http://www.fashionotes.com/content/2012/10/has-vogue-been-a-little-slow-on-the-digital-uptake/#yy213gcfCqpoUUDl.99 


Personally I cannot say anything about the Vogue iPad add since I don't own any Apple products. Of course it makes sense that the App is still imperfect because it still relatively new. The Internet wasn't as fast as it is now in the 1990's. Everything is work in progress but saying that App platform isn't right for Vogue and maybe they should not waste time on it is wrong.  Apps are a very important marketing tool,  if Vogue didn't have an app they would have fallen behind on sales etc. Apps are important to keep up with time but they need work and as I already said everything is work in progress. 


This article talks about the Vogue website. I cannot completely agree with this because I personally haven't seen the problems with the website that this article is talking about. Other problem with the article that it talks about the website in a very web design oriented manner. It seems like it was written by a web designer for other web designers. Perhaps common people like me and you would have not noticed the defaults of the website that the article mentions.  

All publishers should learn lessons from Vogue’s new website launch | 06 Sep 2012

Sometimes, being at the cutting edge of fashion isn’t the most sensible strategy.

Right now, in the world of digital publishing, HTML5* is about as fashionable and as cutting edge as you can get. The publishing prize that HTML5 offers is the possibility of building a web page that will automatically rearrange its component parts (pictures, headlines, text, navigation) to display well on any and all screens – from the largest desktop monitor to the titchiest smartphone display – using responsive design (see the background note at the bottom of this blog). In practice, publishers trying out HTML5 – which is still in development – have found it quite a task to get anything other than simple, text-heavy layouts to work predictably for all browsers and all devices, and at the moment the prize is proving somewhat elusive.

So when the UK edition of Vogue announced that it had completely rebuilt its website using HTML5, it got me very excited indeed. This is a complex, luxurious publishing product that is very far removed from simple, text-heavy layouts – and Vogue claims that it now has “…a more beautiful, authoritative and technically advanced fashion website than ever before”.

Sadly, it seems clear to me that the website was launched before it was ready.

Dolly Jones, the website’s editor, states that by “capitalising on the smartest innovation going, we could not be in better shape to continue to dominate the sector”. Proud, confident words, that come after eight months of development work. Perhaps they should have spent another couple of months doing some more testing…

Two minutes with a modern smartphone (a Galaxy SII) showed that there’s quite a bit more work to do before the site is ready for Android. The screengrab to the left shows a news item, where the picture of Signor Pilati is supposed to fit neatly to the width of the screen – but instead has ballooned out of control, resulting in a closeup of a pillar behind his left ear. The one on the right shows a list view of the news section, and you can see that the list has lost its neat ranged-left formatting, with some pictures large and centred, others knocked down to thumbnails, and text/headlines all over the place.

Even with a normal desktop browser, things do not always function as they should. I saw pictures trying to resize themselves several times before settling on a final shape, images that wouldn’t download in a particular browser until the page was refreshed, and a general ‘looseness’ that suggested the underlying rules for how the pages should adapt hadn’t been specified in sufficient detail. In the screengrab on the right you can see that the pic of Natalia holding the Olympic torch has drifted away from its accompanying story, while the model from Agent Provocateur has invaded her own news story.

It seems obvious to me that the website was launched before it was properly fit for viewing. How did this happen? I have no insider knowledge, but an understanding of publishing processes suggests some possible factors:
1) They didn’t do enough testing, and so didn’t uncover the issues.
2) They knew there were still bugs, but were compelled to launch before they were ready by an internally-determined deadline.
3) They were compelled to launch, ready or not, because of deadline promises made to advertisers.

Some of Vogue‘s fans have already left fulsome plaudits on the new website. But I suspect that other people will have gone to the new website, found the same problems that I did (and that was only a ten-minute scrutiny using three devices – it seems likely to me that there will be other issues that I didn’t spot in my short appraisal), and have gone away with their opinion of the Vogue brand diminished – not demolished, just diminished, because underneath it all you can see that there is a bold and interesting website waiting to be finished. And I suspect that this sad outcome was avoidable.

The object of this blog is not to say that HTML5 isn’t going to be very useful for publishers when it finally comes of age, because it will be; nor am I having a pop at Vogue for trying to be a digital publishing innovator, because I applaud its intent, and I hope it will be able to fix all the issues in short order.

What I am saying is that there is a very simple lesson here for all publishing professionals thinking about their digital strategy – and that is, if you’re going to innovate, make sure it works properly before you launch. And if it doesn’t work properly by the planned launch date,postpone the launch until it’s fixed. The timing of every launch should be in the publisher’s gift – don’t sacrifice the chance to make a brilliant launch instead of a flawed launch by mortgaging this precious gift to the suits or the advertisers, and don’t hem yourself in by setting arbitrary deadlines that you later wish you hadn’t.

Mark Rosselli is chairman of CPL

So these are the two articles that contradict what I have been saying previously in this blog.Its interesting that Vogue tries to promote itself as innovative, how they organise these talks about digital age and fashion but then there are these articles that kind of destroy the image that Vogue is trying to achieve. I don't completely agree with them but its nice to read something different and see two sides of the story.

Closer Look at Vogue 2

Previously I looked at Vogue Official Website to understand the transformation that Vogue went through because of the digital revolution. Now I will look on other social media platforms that arrived from the digital revolution  in the past couple of years.

Twitter: 

 

So this is Vogues Twitter page. It can be seen that Vogue homepage and Twitter are very closely connected. All the stories that can be read on their homepage are tweeted or in other words promoted on their Twitter. They also tweet about other topics like food - for example they tweeted about some Halloween cupcakes. Mostly what is tweeted has something to do with the upcoming holidays or what is written on the official website or the magazine, of course some tweets have more of a promotional vibe. The picture shared on this account create a illusion of personal moments of Vogue girls (Vogue employees) being shared with the readers. This gives 800 000 something followers of Vogue the opportunity to be a apart of the posh Vogue lifestyle and be the first to get a glimpse at a new issue of the magazine.

It can also be noted that the tweets are very frequent, there are at least one or two every hour. This supports the idea, that was mentioned previously that print medias (Vogue) content has to be more up to date and the process of getting the content out there needs to be faster. Not to mention that now magazines need to have a discussion with their readers and what better platform for that then Twitter. Out of all the social media platforms at Vogues disposal Twitter is the most interactive one. 

Facebook: 

This is British Vogue Facebook page. It is open to anyone, so that means anyone can like it and have access to the information available on that page. The post on Facebook mostly differ from the tweets that are posted on Twitter. The information on Facebook is not so up to date as on Twitter and perhaps not so interactive. People mostly just press the like button on the post that they like and that where the interaction ends. Of course some more active Facebook users comment and share the post. 

Interesting thing about Vogue Facebook is that you can see all of the important events that have happened in Vogues history  on the timeline.  

The pictures (of wish I don't have a print screen) that are shared on Vogue Facebook and then put into an Album are much more different from those on Twitter but much more similar to those in the magazine. You could say that Facebook is a bit more formal then Twitter and its an extension of the Vogue homepage while as Twitter is more personal and laid back and more promotional, meaning that Vogue Twitter mainly only promotes the magazine,  new places to go out and eat or events that people who aspire to be part of the fashion clique would want to go.  

Tumblr:

This is Vogue Tumblr. Tumblr is basically a collection of images. This social media platform doesn't require much interaction. Of course people have the choice of writing something to the user but mostly people just reblog pictures. On this Tumblr it is possible to find pictures from Vogue from different years. So in a way this website is a archive of images that have been featured in British Vogue. Before the Internet to have access to these pictures it would have meant buying and looking for the old copies of the magazine which would have taken a lot of time and resources.

Pinterest: 

This is a new social media platform that has been gaining popularity on the Internet. Pinterest is similar to Tumblr but instead of just sharing images they are in albums - more like mood boards. So basically Pinterest is an online mood board. Again this is not a place for direct interaction but a place to reblog and like images. Here Vogue images are more organised then on Tumblr but it is also just a archive of Vogue images with some added albums with pictures that perhaps inspire the Vogue girl.

In conclusion it is fair to say that Vogue has expanded its brand and now is available on different social platforms that appeal to a very wide range of people. The content of the magazine is becoming more available, meaning that people now have easy access to images and articles that have been published in Vogue over the years of its existence and also that the readers will have some kind of idea of what to expect from the new issue because of the social media.

Because of the digital age the magazine and its social platforms have become more of a promotional tool. On all of the social medias its written what to buy, what kind of music is cool right now because the fashion editor is "listening" to it or where is the healthiest food place. Because of this change Vogue is now not just merely a fashion "bible", as it has been called in the past years but more of a luxury lifestyle magazine. All in all everything that Vogue has done digitally/ on the Internet has been successful, of course it might be because of  the long history behind the name, but in any case the magazine has been one of the first ones to branch into Internet. 

Personally I really liked the Vogue Website. It was very different to different fashion related website that I have seen previously and that I read everyday. I wish other magazines would work on their online appearance to make it stand out more.

Closer Look at Vogue

So I thought that it would be interesting to take a closer look to Vogues online present and maybe analyse what are they trying to achieve with it.

I wanted to look at the Vogue app but since I am not a Apple user and the app won't open on my PC I cannot do that. That is why I will look at the official website, Facebook account, Twitter account and any other social media account that they have.

Official Website: 

So this is the first thing when you open British Vogue official website (31/10/2012) The layout is very clean and minimal, so its very easy to work you're way through the website.

I outlined the trending part to show how the website is using words that have become popular with the help of Twitter like trending. That section automatically shows you what is popular right now and what are people looking at. Also they way it reminds me of Twitter is that Twitter also has the trending section on their website and it was their idea, which proved to be very successful. So, apparently Vogue is embracing it. So from the moment you enter their website you are guided to articles to read.

When you scroll down a little bit you see the Today's News. This shows that Vogue updates their news everyday. Supporting the previous posts and statements in them that Vogue needs to be constantly updated to stay on top of the game. Also you can see or assume, if you are not a Vogue reader, that so far the content of the website is very different from the magazine. Magazine might talk about events that will happen this month but it will not discuss anything too recent or have statements/news of Lady Gaga and her wanting Adele's confidence or Kate Mosses breakdown. The magazine will be more fashion focused. 

If you scroll a bit more down you have the 100 Best Shoes and Best Dressed articles (shortcuts to them). Those are the articles that stay there for longer then just a day. Vogue probably changes them once a week or once every two weeks. 

So these two pictures is what you would see when you would scroll till the end of the webpage. At the end you can find on going articles, like the on with Pixie Geldof and you can also find articles - the most read articles (not sure if most read of the day but logically it should be so). Also links to Vogues social media is seen at the bottom of the opening page of their website. It is interesting that Vogue shows the numbers of their followers, if  a lot of magazines an publications don't like to do that.

I pressed a random button on the menu the explore the website better. As you can see I pressed on Trends and this is what came up. I would also like to note that the website doesn't have a lot of adverts and when they do show them they are not "in your face" so they are not distracting the readers from the content.  

 

After I pressed on the first article and this what showed up. You can see on top (outlined with a red circle) the social media buttons, so any reader can like or retweet this article or a link to it. The buttons also show you the number of likes and retweets that this article already has. Personally I find the menu on the left side very interesting because I haven't seen anything like it before. Most of fashion magazines (also Vogue in the past) had the menu on top and had a very similar layouts to each other. This also proves that Vogue is the leader of fashion magazines, because its being different and embracing its online presents. 

This is a picture of what you can see when you scroll down - at the end of the article. There you see relevant pictures to the trend but also a place to comment about the article. As it can be seen the comment section looks a lot like Facebook in its design because it is. If a person comments in that section that will be seen on their official website and on their official Facebook page under the relevant post. 

It is fascinating how to different website are merged together and are so closely connected. The impression that I got from the website is that all their social platforms are well connected and that they are trying to make it easier to post about their articles - example of Facebook comment section being on their website. This shows how Vogue is using their social platforms to promote themselves and mainly the magazine, which people were scared will stop existing. With this Vogue is reaching a bigger audience then just with their magazine.