Write My Dissertation: Us Weekly vs. People
First off, my apologies for the prolonged absence. I’m going through a period of what I’ve come to call “dissertation lent,” writing thousands of words a day in my attempt to get my final chapters of my dissertation to my adviser before February 7th [this is all part of the greater plan to defend in early May, which would make it possible for me to receive my Ph.D. on my 30th birthday]. Rest assured, once this and the next hurdle (e.g. revisions) are finished, I’ll return in force.
While I can’t devote time to crafting long-form blog posts, I am posting an article or two to the blog’s Facebook page, which is gradually turning into a little gossip-style community. I would *love* for you to join, if only so I have a more direct manner of reaching readers. You can do so by looking over the right on the main page of the blog, or by going here and clicking “Join.” I absolutely promise that I will not exploit your readership in any way — no ads, no selling your information, no Facebook tomfoolery. But it’s a great way to post stories of note, especially if you don’t use/follow on Twitter.
As for the title of this post: I’m currently working my way through the chapter that details the rise of Us Weekly in the early 2000s under the editorial guidance of Bonnie Fuller and Janice Min. You may or may not know that Us has been around since 1978 — founded by the New York Times company, believe it or not — and went through several owners before Jann Wenner, aka founder of Rolling Stone, obtained full control in the mid-’80s. At some point, I’ll post versions of the chapters detailing with Us‘ continued struggles in the ’80s and ’90s (it was donned “Jann’s Vietnam”). In 2001, Disney obtained half-interested in the company; in 2002, Wenner hired Fuller, and the magazine became what we know it as today — a super glossy, unabashedly celebrity-focused publication that has gradually incurred on People‘s previous hallowed territory. Fuller was responsible for “Stars: They’re Just Like Us,” the magazine’s unique approach to headlines, the pastel color palate, and the overarching turn towards paparazzi photography, all of which have become hallmarks of the magazine. Fuller resigned in 2003 (if you’ve followed the business, she attempted to turn Star into a glossy, and has since been hired at mail.com, home of Nikki Finke) and was replaced her “no. 2″ Janice Min, who ran the magazine until 2009, refining Fuller’s tactics.
So I’ve read all sorts of articles in the trades (e.g. the magazines meant for people who work in the publishing, advertising, and filmmmaking industry) talking about the changes, the competition between People and Us, the way that Us appealed to a certain type of reading (young, more educated, more wealthy), the way that Us made celebrity gossip something that you weren’t ashamed to read at the nail salon, etc. etc.
But trades can only tell you so much. So what I want to know, loyal reader, is YOUR memory of Us and People — especially in 2002-2005, but today as well.
Do you remember the first time you noticed Us in the supermarket?
The first story that you wanted to read? The first time you bought it/read it?
What do you remember about the contents of those early issues — did they strike you as different than People? How? Do you remember “Stars: They’re Just Like Us?” Was it compelling? Why?
In general, what do you see as the differences between the two magazines? If you can only buy one, which one would you choose? Why?
What demographics do you think each magazine is catering to? Do you consider yourself part of the target demographic?
Do you notice an aesthetic difference between the magazines? Or different ways that they approach celebrity culture in general?
There are SO MANY other ways you could take this, and I would love to hear ANYTHING concerning your opinions, analysis, WHATEVER concerning the two magazines. This is *by far* the most interesting part of the dissertation yet, if simply because I have such a keen memory of the way that Us took the market by storm…..and I can’t wait to hear your own thoughts and memories.
3 Responses to “Write My Dissertation: Us Weekly vs. People”
Growing up, my somewhat conservative Christian mother read People, which I now realize is a very odd departure from her other reading material (think Guideposts and James Dobson books). In that context, it never occurred to me that People was a tabloid mag, sort of trashy, if you will. I just thought it was what you read if TV Guide didn’t have enough entertainment gossip but you weren’t prepared to subscribe to Entertainment Weekly.
I first noticed US Weekly in college, if memory serves me correctly (and that would have been in the 2002-2005 era). For one, it was available at the campus gym, encouraging women like myself to pick it up despite our women’s studies majors. After all, third wave feminism is all about deconstructing pop culture (or at the very least, admitting it has a profound impact on us). It seemed odd at the time, the tabloid dark horse in a sense, that had suddenly invaded our lives. It was also a period in which I found myself paying attention to celebrity gossip because of peer pressure. Two of my close friends read these magazines (and people.com) a LOT, and much like it became hard to admit I didn’t have a TV (because frankly, I hate a lot of television), it felt like I could no longer admit that I resisted celebrity gossip. It suddenly seemed too snobby, too ridiculously elitist, even with friends. So I started reading why celebs are “just like me,” mostly with morbid fascination that anyone is followed to the supermarket or park and disallowed the freedom most of us have (arguably ‘had’ since Flickr/Facebook uploads against your will have become somewhat common) to just go about our lives in public.
At first I just saw US as a major contender, not a game changer. But it’s hard to say now if rags like US altered People because for so long, I just thought People was what you read when you wanted photos of Princess Di or you were interested in Faith Hill at home but didn’t want to buy Redbook or Good Housekeeping. People seems to have kept sections that US will never have — like book reviews, albeit rather shoddily veiled PR shilling, but still! they’re in there! — but either I have more perspective on how People always was, or they’ve had to shift gears to keep up. I still think of People as less trashy, less sleazy, and think they’ve kept that image but forgoing the pastels, the “just like us” features (well, minus those opening photo spreads, but haven’t they always had those?), and for still paying top dollar for the most elite celebrity stories/photos (ie, Brad and Ang sell baby photos to People; Levi and Bristol land covers elsewhere because they aren’t ‘classy’ enough or arguably as compelling). They don’t totally peddle pure gossip and if memory serves correctly, you (was it you?) did a roundup of how truthful various tabloid magazine covers/content are. People ranked first with 70% or something, I believe.
I never buy either at the newsstand — I’m not sure what would cause me to do so — but I read people.com (and The Superficial) every day, whereas I never read US Weekly’s website. I haven’t read an US courtesy of the gym in so long that I assumed the “just like us” feature still exists. Sounds like it might not now.
I could talk about this forever. I’ll close by saying that I assume People’s demographic is a bit older and a bit more educated. That’s just what I think, based on absolutely nothing except that I know people who read both, or just one or the other, and People seems to skew older/more educated while US does not.
Okay, real quickly, though if you come up with a survey, I would be happy to answer it. I’m a bit nervous to say this, but could there, perhaps, be a class issue with these two magazines? Like how Playboy is classier than Penthouse, which is way classier than Hustler? I real People for the articles! Really! US Weekly exists only for the photos of stars. When they are looking bad, I am particularly amused-I love exposing the industry for the dream machine that it is. “Star are just like me” actually means I could be that beautiful if only I had money, a team of trainers, and refused to eat for days and days. The flip side is that Cameron Diaz is an illusion. She’s not pretty at all! US Weekly exposes that. Meanwhile, People shows us Cameron Diaz and her dogs, frolicking. I’m not a quantoid, but I’d be interested to know the # relationship between the two magazines: number of profiles with star participation, number of features, number of words (period), number of images, number of ads, and on and on.
hello! I have just discovered your site and am loving it. The reason I always pick up Us Weekly-although they recently changed this-is that until recently the first full 2 pages were top-to-bottom spreads of celebrities in fabulous fashions. I’ll leave the analysis to you, but I loved that I could always turn to the first page and the best fashion glamour shots would be right there-perfect for the 2 minutes in line at the grocery store. (However recently they’ve been pushed 10-20 pages into the magazine-my theory is that folks like me perused but never bought.)
I don’t like People because the fashion isn’t there and also, let’s be honest, I don’t want to read about any non-famous regular people with dramatic stories which People often covers. I don’t want to read sob stories about middle American mothers-or about celebrities, actually. Mostly I want to look at pictures of celebrities, read smutty gossip about them, and see what fabulous outfits they’ve been wearing. I’ll be interested to hear more about how Us caters to a more educated, wealthier readership, as you note above-to me it seems they have fewer long-form articles which is great since I do my actual reading elsewhere-these glossies are my picture book.
I hope your dissertation is coming along! Really enjoying your site, as I said. Star formation! Who knew!