Following weeks of hot
weather headlines, we've finally been exposed to an exciting new topic – the future
King has been born.
But despite this being a
monumental moment in British history, some magazines still manage to devise
something negative to publish about the supposedly joyous occasion. OK! magazine released a cover story the
day after baby George was born, boasting about having talked to Kate’s personal trainer on how she is going to lose the baby weight. It is the
timing of this cover article which I find most disagreeable, giving it just a
day before Kate’s baby weight has been publicly highlighted. This could not be
further from the fundamental news that a future King has been born.
These disfigured views on
what’s important are a reflection on society in general. If magazines are
writing what sells, then this bad press sells. It most certainly has given OK! magazine an enormous amount of publicity
which is never a bad thing for the company. Even if the reasoning for the
publicity isn’t a good thing, some may say bad press is better than no press at
all.
Members of the public took to
twitter to express their outrage. The hashtag #Don’tBuyOK was created in an
attempt to boycott sales of the magazine. The social networking site gave an
opportunity for the public to create a strong resistance against OK! magazine which they could not
ignore. OK! released a public
statement:
“Kate is one of the great beauties of our age and OK! readers love her. Like the rest of
the world, we were very moved by her radiance as she and William introduced the
Prince of Cambridge to the world.
We would not dream of being critical of her
appearance. If this was misunderstood because of our cover it was not
intended.”
In
my opinion, this statement is full of empty words. To claim that ‘OK! readers love her’ completely
contradicts what they have published. If they really did love her – they would focus on the happiest times of her life rather than how glamorous she should look a few days after
giving birth? OK! magazine’s intentions
are clear. Their fundamental aim is to sell magazines and make money.
There
has to be a line however on what can go on the shelves. This kind of abuse is
published everyday about celebrities, but it has taken comments aimed at Kate
Middleton for it to be addressed. Considering that the editorial board of OK! magazine is majority female,
including the official Editor Kirsty Tyler (who coincidently has only been in
the chair for a few weeks), they should be ashamed of themselves. Whether it is
royalty or not the message portrayed is morally wrong.
Regardless
of the magazine’s sales and publicity, it can not be considered commendable.
By Louise Greenway
No comments:
Post a Comment