If I Were EIC of Vogue...

I would have more model diversity: skinny, plus-size, young, old, voluptuous, black, white, Asian, Middle Eastern, Indian, established, new, etc. You'd find them all in the magazine every month.

I would put more models in general on the cover: Arlenis Sosa, Hilary Rhoda, Lily Donaldson, Jourdan Dunn, Kristen McMenamy, and some fresh faces who are just breaking onto the scene.

I would have more high/low fashion spreads. Pairing something from Target with something by Chanel (Lagerfeld would probably kill me, but anyway).

I wouldn't put Gwyneth Paltrow on the cover for at least a full year. Or maybe more. Or maybe forever.

I would accept short story submissions from writers whether they were previously published or not. Vogue used to do this back in the day. I think it's a great way to discover new talent. Plus, short fiction rocks.

I'd have less society pages. They'd still be there, just not as often. I know the socialites featured probably donate money to Vogue or whatnot. But they'd have to settle for being featured less often. Unless someone truly fabulous came along. Someone like Babe Paley.

My motto would be: Always keep them guessing. I'd keep readers on their toes, wondering what would be in the magazine for next month. In other words, I'd try not to be as predictable as the current Vogue.

What's Wrong With This Picture?

Well, nothing. It's Halle Berry! She looks gorgeous and this cover is at least ten times better than last month's with awkward Gwyneth.

But you know what is wrong? That Halle is the first black woman on the cover of the September Issue (the biggest issue of the year) since 1989! That's right, it's been almost TWO DECADES since a woman of color was on the cover of this coveted issue. In 1989 the honor went to Naomi Campbell, and she was the first black woman ever to be on the cover of the September Issue.

I know I've talked about lack of diversity in Vogue's covers before, but I still don't get why Vogue won't address it. Or why Vogue is so stingy with putting women of color on the cover.

I. Just. Don't. Get. It.

It just makes me sad that in 2010 we're still talking about these issues. I feel like I'm living in the Dark Ages.

No More Gwyneth Paltrow

Gwyneth Paltrow is to me what wire hangers were to Joan Crawford. Okay, so maybe that's not the most appropriate comparison. I don't hate Gwyneth (in fact, I used to worship her), but I'm so tired of seeing her on Vogue covers at least once a year. Is she really that fascinating? Does she really have that much to say? I will leave those up as rhetorical questions.

Also, this cover? Standard Vogue fare: Boring, bland, and just plain bad. There's absolutely nothing special about it. Vogue is supposed to be the bible for fashion and this is the best they can come up with? In a word: Uninspiring.

I want to be wowed for once. I want to keep each issue like I used to instead of dumping it with relief into the recycling bin. If I wasn't a subscriber, I would never ever EVER buy this off the newsstand. I mean, the hair is stuck flat against her face, the dress is unremarkable, and is it just me, or does that pose look really uncomfortable and unnatural? I just wish Vogue would step it up. But I'm starting to think that Vogue doesn't care anymore. Or it has a completely different agenda than what I used to think it had. And I'm not sure what that agenda is now.

I'm Yawning Furiously (Yes, It's Possible)

So, Blake Lively is on the cover of Vogue again. She was also on the January cover last year (correct me if I'm wrong because I'm too lazy to fact-check--hey, it's a blog! I don't have to fact-check). Ahem, anyway, the cover is...pretty. Aren't most magazine covers pretty? Yeah, sure they are, but pretty is also boring. Pretty doesn't have to be boring. Pretty can be interesting and sexy and fun and ferocious and, dare I say it, fierce. But this cover? It's just pretty and bland and vanilla. And it's making me yawn every time I look at it.

I wish Vogue would use more fashion models. I wish Vogue would put Chanel or Jourdan or Sessilee on the cover, and not all at the same time, but individually. I'm a subscriber so I'm kinda stuck with the covers I get no matter what, but if I weren't one, I would never pick up this copy from the newsstand. Never. Ever.

There's nothing on this cover that jumps out and says, "Read me! Or if you don't want to read me at least buy me and look at the awesome pictures within!" I mean, let's take a look at the cover headlines: "A Golden Boy's Tales From The Dark Side." Okay, I guess that is sort of interesting, except that I have no idea who this "golden boy" is. Is it Brad Pitt? Then I might care (but mostly not). Also, "tales from the dark side" is such a cliche. I think I heard it for the first time when I was, like, 9 and watching Nickelodeon's Are You Afraid of the Dark?

Another headline: "65 Cool Swimsuits For Every Body." This is mildly interesting because summer is almost here and we're all gonna be hitting the beach soon. But, alas, it's only mildly interesting. If I want to look at swimsuits, I'd just get a copy of Shape or I'll just--gasp!--check out this year's Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition.

The headline for the cover girl just says "Blake Lively Heats Up The Beach." That's it? Um, 'kay. That's fascinating. Really. It is. /Sarcasm

Also, who wears a sweater over her swimsuit when she's supposed to be "heating up the beach"? Is she heating it up because she's wearing a sweater and sweaters usually function as clothing items designed to keep you warm? I don't know. Do you?

The one thing that did actually excite me was the headline "Glee's Matthew Morrison." Vogue, you had me at Glee.

There's also a story and pictorial about Jack White and Karen Elson. Karen was also featured in Marie Claire this month (Yes, I subscribe to way too many mags), so why is she in the June 2010 issue of Vogue? I think she's a great model and she has a great look, but I've been seeing her in Vogue for about a decade now. That's great. It's awesome to see models who have longevity in this business, but FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, can you please feature other models once in a while? Pretty please? I know there are plenty to choose from.

What Vogue Covers Should Be

Finally, a good Vogue cover. Actually, a GREAT Vogue cover. One that actually makes you want to pick up the magazine from the newsstand or actually open the issue if you're a subscriber like me. Gisele Bundchen (looking great after recently giving birth to her first child with husband Tom Brady) sells all the sweet promises of spring with her fresh-faced good looks, gorgeous skin, and playful yet seductive style. This is the kind of cover that might actually inspire consumers to buy all the goodies within (if they had money or a job, that is). After the horrendous cover with Jessica Biel that made both her and denim look like the unsexiest things EVER, I'm beyond pleased with this cover. For now, at least. Hopefully, this is the start of Vogue's covers going in a new, better direction.

Color and Size

So, I also subscribe to Teen Vogue (I know, right? I'm totally crazy) and I got my November 2009 issue in the mail today. I am very happy with the cover. It's beautiful, stylish, wholesome. The red lips and sleek ponytails are in great taste.

Recently, I've noticed that I actually crave women of color on my magazine covers. I'm white, and I don't know if certain publishers think white women only want to see other white women on magazine covers, but that is not the case with me and with many other white women that I know. I love seeing black, Asian and Hispanic women on magazine covers. I'm glad Teen Vogue is acknowledging that non-white teens read their magazine, and that the powers that be have chosen to represent them. Enough with the insipid Lauren Conrads. I am, quite frankly, getting bored with seeing the same cookie-cutter and rather bland blue-eyed blondes staring blankly at me from the covers of pretty much every single major magazine. I'm willing to bet many others are bored as well.

Adult Vogue has been pretty good lately about featuring women of color on its covers what with Beyonce and Michelle Obama landing the coveted spot this past year. But they still have a long way to go. Most of the fashion editorials feature white models, and it's been a while since a black model has been on the adult Vogue cover.

Before I praise Teen Vogue too much though, I have to say that Chanel and Jourdan are a bit too skinny for my taste. I mean, they're really really ridiculously skinny. Just take a look at that first picture of them walking arm-in-arm. Their legs are basically stilts! Let's be honest, they do not look healthy. Although the color issue has not been completely resolved, I think a lot of attention needs to be paid to how skinny these models look.

Although, at this point it's like beating a dead horse. We can talk about it all day, but nothing is ever going to be done about it. Even with the recent deaths of two models from complications arising from eating disorders, the fashion industry barely batted a faux eyelash. Yes, I'm sure some of these girls are truly blessed and are naturally (and infuriatingly) skinny. But most of them? No way. Seriously, Chanel and Jourdan could both put on at least 20 pounds, easy, and still look great. Get on it, Vogue. I'm watching, and blogging.

Vogue Doesn't Care About Women

This is the conclusion I must come to after seeing a two-page ad for Davidoff cigarettes in the September 2009 issue of Vogue. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought cigarette ads were outlawed on billboards and in magazines. Has this rule changed? Maybe, but in any case, I think it's incredibly irresponsible of Vogue to feature cigarette ads and, thereby, to continue glamorizing this deplorable habit.

Vogue is always telling women how to look their best and feel their best and be their best. The importance of taking care of one's body, exercising to stay healthy, following the macrobiotic diet a la Vogue darlings Madonna and Gwyneth, and other such be-good-to-yourself messages are touted in every single tree-destroying issue to the point of redundancy. Over the years, I've seen numerous editorials about cancer research, articles written by cancer survivors, etc., and now seeing this ad is like a slap in the face, and just downright hypocritical. They do know that cigarettes cause cancer, right?

Smoking is not sexy or cool or fashionable. It's disgusting. It ceased to be "en vogue" years ago. Yes, many models, editors and designers smoke. Many of them also do hard drugs. It doesn't make it OK to feature ads glorifying the act. Vogue prides itself on having good taste in fashion, beauty and art among other things. Well, the decision to run this ad was in very poor taste.

I know that ad sales are a magazine's bread and butter, but I think Vogue should've passed on this one. I'm pretty sure they could've afforded to do so.