The issue features 15 women Meg feels are "forces for change", most of with some connection to the entertainment industry.
There are no businesswomen on the cover, no scientists or researchers, and only one woman who holds public office.
(There is, however, a tiny mirror, so if you've founded a company, are developing lifesaving drugs, or are a member of Parliament or Congress, you can see yourself next to Christy Turlington and Gemma Chan.)
Not on the cover, but reportedly inside the magazine, is the sole A+ celebrity.
That's Michelle Obama, exclusively interviewed by Meghan. Michelle's motives in agreeing to the interview are unknown.
Vogue for change
There's certainly some irony in using Vogue UK as a medium to affect "change", since it's raison d'ĂȘtre is to sell a constantly updated carousel of clothing, shoes, and make-up and perfume to well-off Western women, as well as offering the occasional plastic surgery suggestion.It's a little like an issue of Car and Driver that focuses on bicycling.
To the left, to the left
Meg's choices (and the choices of Vogue UK editor Edward Enninful - he might have suggested Salma Hayak, whose husband heads one of Vogue's largest advertisers) hew sharply to the leftish end of the political spectrum, including a couple of women who have raised questions about the necessity of a monarchy.That may not be good for sales.
It's certainly a turnoff for traditional monarchy lovers, the sort of people who rushed to buy the 2016 issue of Vogue UK featuring the Duchess of Cambridge.
And it may not bring in a new audience, either.
"Go woke, get broke," has affected a number of name brands, such as ESPN, which lost viewership when it strayed away from sports towards politics.
People who are interested in progressive politics are probably already reading The Guardian, The Huffington Post, Buzzfeed, or Vox online for free, and may not be eager to spend 4 pounds for a paper copy of Vogue UK.
What do you think of Meghan's Vogue UK cover?
Comments
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7295371/JAN-MOIR-cause-Meghan-Markle-supporting-Foundation.html
JAN MOIR: The cause Meghan Markle is mostly supporting is the Me, Myself and I Foundation
By Jan Moir for the Daily Mail
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7295371/JAN-MOIR-cause-Meghan-Markle-supporting-Foundation.html
"You have to wonder how a woman, whose jarring demands for privacy make the ultra-secretive Bilderberg group look like a desperate boy band, can suddenly disport herself across a magazine and a website that is read and devoured by millions."
A must read opinion piece.
The Gucci dress that she is wearing is already posted to Meghan's Mirror. But no, there is no relation between $mirkle and Meghan's Mirror shopping site. heh, heh.
I assume Beyoncé said no too.
This means that while $mirkle was not performing her Royal duties pre and post partum, she did have time and energy for her own vanity projects. So much for "maternity leave".
Also read somewhere that Jane Goodall, who is interviewed by Harry for this issue and who last week did some PR for the $hmirkles, actually shares a PR firm with "her highness".
Lastly, the buzz leading up to this stated that $mirkle would be photographed in Frogmore... what happened to that?
Leaves one to wonder why that is, and who is calling in favors for what.
This issue will be widely read, even if only for the same reason that drivers slow down to gawk at car crashes.
Perfectly said, @Julia.
not going to reveal anything. That’s up to the BRF and/or the press.
Every time I see one of those I wonder how many more MM has had planted to try and make her look more popular in the family.
'It's extremely disappointing': Meghan Markle's Vogue issue about 'trailblazing' women has a VERY similar cover to an Australian book the Duchess helped produce - and the authors aren't happy. Australian authors Samantha Brett and Steph Adams have been inundated with messages from people alerting them to the similarities between the latest issue of UK Vogue and their own book.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7296215/Vogue-issue-guest-edited-Meghan-Markle-looks-like-Australian-book-helped-produce.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ico=taboola_feed
News
I’m not terribly thrilled by that cover design, which, as several other posts above have noted, copies the cover of the book she was published in (she’s on the cover as one of 15 women; and wrote a 1 or 2-page essay for it). There’s articles saying they gave her many copies of that book, too, and she approved the cover, so she can’t act like she didn’t know she copied it. The authors/publishers are apparently not happy about the British Bogue cover copying of their concept/design.
Actually, one guy did it two days ago, James Charles posted a video two months after his sexual misconduct scandal, where Kardashians and other celebs chose make up for him (obviously from their make up lines)
I'm sure, she didn't even choose these people, it did Vogue itself.
I think Michelle Obama agreed for an interview, because they both strike for a celebrity/influencer life with Barack, I don't blame them, nothing wrong with it, but Michelle clearly uses an opportunity for pushing her boundaries even more, which makes Meghan here being used, and not vice versa.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7296215/Vogue-issue-guest-edited-Meghan-Markle-looks-like-Australian-book-helped-produce.html
I watched this go online late last night,I also watched the speed all the negative comments on IG
removed!.. there were hundreds of them just disappeared.
So my first thought was where’s Amal,if anyone MM would have there wouldn’t have it been her?.
Is murckles becoming bad for business.
The Plot thickens!
You are quite correct,but if you dig a little deeper the words actually come from a song also
she said Banki Moon the head of the UN at the time gave her a standing ovation when in reality
He was sitting firmly in his seat.
It’s these little white lies which go with her NPD are turning into whoppers,it smacks of desperation
to give herself credibility all done whilst she “dating her Prince”.
I for one have too say I am British and a heavy taxpayer and I’ve always had a interesting and curious
fascination for our monarchy.Im a bit of a history buff but all this is starting to leave a very nasty lingering taste in the mouth.
Ordinary and predictable, much like Meghan Markle
Wondered if this guest editing stint was purposely to give her another rope to hang herself (plagiarism).
Just typed a long comment and it vanished. So here is a condensed version.
I bought magazines regularly around the 1990 period but stopped from 2000 on. They have become way too pricey. Also, substance was lacking in the articles, more fluff than reality. The internet provides almost everything that magazines cover. Purchasing data to access the internet is 100% more on peoples mind than buying a magazine. No way is it first choice now. Magazines are a dying industry.
Also I never purchased Vogue. Too many advertisements on products that I would never buy or use. Too many offbeat articles. Too overpriced, wacky clothing. The libraries have free copies in circulation ..why pay for it.
The black and white cover is a huge turn off. Too morbid. I want colour and vitality. Also i prefer an actual face, rather than a busy throw up of various faces. Definitely would not purchase this September issue, no matter whats inside.
Jane Fonda. Cannot fathom why? I have never admired Michelle Obama. On that gravy train and still milking it.
In short, all magazines have lost my support.
home decor magazines, &
I literally flipped through each one in about 5 minutes. Nothing interesting to read, no new ideas. I get much more interesting content from trend reports that I receive for free via email.
I live in the US and now with all of the lies that the magazines here are printing about MM, I will probably never purchase a magazine again.
I also stopped buying magazines years ago for similar reasons
Now i find a quick flick through at the hairdressers every 3 months is more than enough
But a good Instagram bloggish shot...'the hook'
Reminds me of the banana fiasco
I think that Meghan Markle and Vogue are a perfect fit.
Both are full of advertising
Both are void of interesting content and are vapid & pretentious.
Both are out of touch with reality.
Both are expensive & there is not much value for money
Yes. Most people I know also dont buy magazines. The sales are so bad that cinemas are giving out free copies to patrons, shops are binding 4 magazines together at reduced prices, to encourage sales. I know quite a few under 23 year olds, who say magazines are not on their " to buy list " and never will be.
Back to that cover, the Prime Minister of New Zealand! What on earth was she thinking? She is already a Prime Minister, for heavens sake! Someone ask her to read her resume back to herself and then give herself a few smacks.
As a mother, bringing up young women, I take great exception and offense to those unknown airheads on that cover. Granted they have a story to tell, but dont we all! There are unknown heroines all over the world, working invisibly and tirelessly, some we will never meet or encounter in a lifetime. Its when they start publicizing themselves, and associating with the likes of MM , it ruins their credibilty.
I appreciate the articulate, intelligent and humorous discourse found here... aaand now I’m finally posting.
@Rut, I also read that about Prince George’s nickname. In addition, I read an interview with the Givenchy designer Clare Waight Keller (apparently still BFFs with MM) and it mentioned that her son’s name is Harrison. I’m eyerolling at the thought of MM believing she was original and boundary pushing with the baby’s names.
On the other hand, maybe she was taken by surprise that it was a boy and didn’t have time to really consider boys’s names?! All the decorations that were delivered to the baby shower (from
The ‘pap walk’ pics) and various images posted on social media seemed to suggest the baby would be a girl.
... I dunno, I’m feeling as gaslighted as the next person...
"It's all about her, wait until the marriage crumbles and Megs starts doing tell all interviews. "There were four of us in this marriage, Harry, me, myself and I, so it was a bit crowded.:"
I think about Nutty's notation that no woman of science or math is listed is good. For all the women's equality movement up from the far depths of the past, women have been making strides in what had always been traditionally men's fields.
I think about the heavy tilt into entertainment. That would be in keeping with the people Vogue is trying to be relevant to. But notice who isn't there but is known for dancing in that corner of my photo out there. Bey. Serena. Amal. All big cheeses. All supposedly big, big supporters of her when she was criticised. Poof. Not there. My question to you: Have they been Markled?
Working on this fantastic opportunity while on her maternity leave. I could see this as an on and off long term work/compilation except that she missed other events because she was on leave but could show up to TLK. That picking and choosing what would be fun versus less personal fun/opportunity to meet people perceived as worth networking with is the clearest indication she still doesn't understand that what she thinks of as small not worthy of her events are really a big deal to the people running and showing up for them. They are why people still love the person within the monarchy.
I loved the comment about how she would have put herself but it was a tad boastful. Tee hee hee. The comment reminds me of how there are a lot of people who don't understand what they are really saying when they use a double negative. She does understand it.
All the rest, the same cover, clothing not looking good on her and so on, pff. For her, that is MM business as usual.
Oh and where's her BEST FRIENDS Amal Clooney and Serena Williams or did they get ghosted?
I could create my own Twitter account to say "I know something but I'm not going to tell you". What's the point?
I also stopped buying magazines years ago - cost too much and takes up real estate plus it's not environmentally friendly.
They are publicity whores.
"Looks a little like the wanted posters wall of the local post office"
I like your idea!
Very funny
If MM's wants to be your friend then you need to have a 'commodity of value' to her benefit....of course
So profound...so true
Now it seems that Anna Wintour won't be satisfied until she has brutally murdered & buried Vogue in a deep dark pit, before she swans out the backdoor to enjoy her much needed retirement
What a pity Anna Wintour was at the helm of a well respected magazine
Leaving a legacy 'not' to be admired
She is a faux feminist
She is also a faux humanitarian
Marrying a rich man with a title and giving up everything you say you hold dear to you...family, career, friends,home, (oh wait...that doesn't apply to the MM the narcissist) even your pets, says it all
She just likes to hear the sound of her own voice,blah blah blah.
There is no understanding or commitment to any of the issues at hand...because it doesn't revolve around her small orbit
Vogue - a magazine that exists solely to promote the superficial world of fashion and beauty.
Vogue - a magazine that projects women as objects, hangers for clothing and makeup, often at the cost of their physical and mental wellbeing.
Vogue - a magazine that turns a blind eye to the fashion industry’s exploitation of women and child garment workers, and the fact that the fashion industry is one of the biggest polluters of our planet.
Enter the DoS with yet more of her uninteresting, unoriginal, and ineffective drivel about forces for change. The irony of using Vogue (of all magazines!) as the vehicle to send out more of her “woke” SJW rhetoric is yet another spectacular own goal on her part. I can’t stop shaking my head.
And yet poor Mike Tindall gets his hand slapped for saying the truth - his children have not yet met their second cousin. (DM article today).
A narcissist like Meghan is an interesting breed. On the one hand, they are intolerably arrogant and convinced that they know the best way to do everything. That's how they come across. But underneath, where the sense of self is supposed to reside, they are gaping holes of emptiness. They are obsessed with being 'popular', admired, adored . . but they don't have any original ideas or convictions of their own. Everything does have to be boosted and copied from other sources to create a constructed wonderful personality for themselves. In reality they are hollow. It's really not surprising that Meg chose acting as a profession--the job that entirely consists of attempting to convince viewers that fabricated personalities are real. Well-balanced people (not to mention, those with genuine talent) have a bedrock sense of actual identity that they revert to when they are not playing a role . . and they don't forget who they really are. Someone like Meghan is constantly playing a role because there's no 'There' there underneath. If her presentation is inconsistent, it's because she tries on different roles like hats and keeps or discards them based on the reaction (ie, Instagram followers) she gets. She's so totally obsessed with her SM numbers because to her, those numbers validate her faked-up identities.
It's got to be a fraught, dark, anxious and swampy place inside the mind of Murkle. Even when she appears to be 'winning' (not currently, alas for her . .) she will never be content. She is not capable. Meanwhile, she will continue to ruin lives around her in her quest to pass for a spectacularly successful, desirable human being.
Marklelies: (noun) a lie so grandiose, so vapid, and yet, so easily disproved, that it could only be told by meghan markle ("The marklelies were flying in that interview" "Duchess Skank probably marklelies in her sleep!") (verb) "She totally marklelied about _________" (<<pick one, lots to choose from).
Duchess Skank probably marklelies in her sleep! -- verb.
I always enjoy your writing (mini novels...heehee) and the many, well laid out and clear synopsis's you make of MM's character, or lack of in her case
I agree with you about her character & her acting.
I think the reasons you mentioned are why she is not and never will be a very good actress and why she never made it in Hollywood.
MM is all about the reflection (hence the mirror..lol) of herself & severely lacks self introspection & soul.
She comes across as extremely shallow with no real depth of character or tangible emotions to draw from
I heard that when MM was young that Doria was in jail for 7 years and during this time she was with her father, who i think has overcompensated & spoilt her.
Before that she lived with her grandmother and uncle.
So in fact she has never lived for any great length of time with her mother
It explains a lot of her character
I have a feeling that as cray cray as Samantha Markle came across, she knew the truth about MM & in reflection what she was saying was pretty spot on.
Where is the book! I'd pay to read that!
@Elle I'm using Chrome.
.
Precisely! I can not figure if it was a deliberate snub or old CLoony put his foot down
As Amal is a human rights lawyer I would have though she would have been given slot.
I am no Markle fan but I do give credence to Amal who is a self made woman and well
education who even gives lectures on law at high standing universities,my godfather
Was Robert Watson a senior barrister in the old Bailey,he always said he admired Amal’s
Mind.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1159253/meghan-markle-news-latest-vogue-editor-letter-pictures
I am unsure if she is just so incredibly ignorant or doesn't care. I am leaning towards the latter
I wonder if 'Archie' will be there so the Queen can pose for a legitimate picture with him?
Megsy incubated a magazine but I still don't think there's a baby that is hers. The RF allowed that charade to play out for far too long . . .how are they going to rectify this?
"MM has more issues than Vogue"
It made me laugh
It makes perfect sense,fleabottom was the town in kings landing that surrounds the royal residence.
Didn’t Peggymeggy get the name Archie from Prince George seventh of his name,house of Cambridge
As I believe it was a pet nickname given to him by PPO when he was a toddler,( they use false names on radiobands) and it stuck.So..it was something she pilfered maybe to stick the knife in to Catherine as she new early that Archie wouldn’t get a title a statues.
Everything Peggymeggy does seems to have an agenda to it which is classic narcissism,I really thought they would call him Alexander maybe or even Albert,something with Charles to honour his beloved Pa.
Bless her heart, surprised they haven't tried to canonize her
sarc off. What a hot mess (and more of it each day).
The Duchess is a trashy wanna be, D list actress who screwed the right guy. She has no light to shine. She's basically a pseudo hooker who found someone dumb enough to keep paying her. I cannot pretend that she is anything other and for every "celebrity" who goes along with this gaslighting BS insults us and feeds the beast. No more Hayek for me (not that she has a real career anymore anyway because she was also a mid-list actor who screwed the right guy.)
I had the pleasure of seeing those photos. I use 'pleasure' ironically. It's just so gratifying to watch her continue to light herself on fire and say "Look how I'm shining a light on the world, all you sad un-woke lesser beings! She really put those in the magazine for all to see!
She looks like a sow stuffed with about 20 babies who's rummaging for truffles. Then I really love the second one where she's standing back up and 'Moonbump' is squashed and spreading out sideways. Gucci has to be so thrilled with how she's representing their garment . . . bet women are flocking to pay $4000 for that pretentious sack after they saw how Meg modeled it so uniquely.
I had no idea that Gucci made clothing in that size, did you?
She couldn't be at all comfortable stuffed into that dress like that. I guess "One must suffer to be fashionable" is her new mantra.
@Hikari -- that dress is something, isn't it? You know who could wear that dress and make it look good? Kate. But not megster, and the moonbump. Oy.
This photo series should forever be known as the Grasp and Claw. She still managed to get some bump and claw in for good measure, too.
This is not strictly relevant to the Suxxit travesty, but I include it as an example of how a bona fide quality celebrity person treats people. 007 star Daniel Craig exercised his license to 'thrill' by dropping by a hen party-in-progress at his hotel in Scotland. He stayed for a good bit and posed for photos with the bride and her guests. At no point was hotel staff instructed to confiscate anyone's cell phone or gouge out the eyes of any civilians who looked upon Himself.
Dan Craig is a mensch . . .and also one thousand times the star that Murkle thinks she and her dim-witted husband are.
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/scottish-news/4535659/james-bond-daniel-craig-hen-party-aviemore/