Share

People. People Who Don't Need People

by: Walter Brasch, t r u t h o u t | Perspective

photo
"Since 1989, People's editors believed they were given the divine right to anoint who they believe are the most beautiful people on the planet." (Photo: People)

    From a pool of about seven billion, those hard-working geniuses at People magazine have managed to find the 100 most beautiful people in the whole wide world. And - get ready for the surprise - almost all of those beautiful people are rich American celebrities.

    Since 1989, People's editors believed they were given the divine right to anoint who they believe are the most beautiful people on the planet. The ethnocentric celebrity-fawning People editors are so secure in their self-imposed knowledge that they don't even reveal the criteria they used to make their determinations. Not even an "editor's note," common in most magazines.

    People etches its version of reality into our minds by attaching cutesy capsulated biographies to full-page color pictures of the most beautiful, and drops the 60 to 80 page section among myriad $254,000 a page full-color ads every May. Advance stories about some of the selections appear in just about every American newspaper and major web site, all of which think stories about celebrities are more important than stories about the recession, thus assuring that the Beautiful People Special will be one of the best-read issues of the year. The reality is the lists are really the "100 most noticed celebrities," but that probably wouldn't get as many sales.

    For several years, People had the "50 Most Beautiful" list, but apparently had trouble deciding how to reduce those seven billion people to only 50, so the editors doubled the number. But, they still had to squeeze 100 into the space of 50. So, the editors killed quality writing, and made most of the pictures the size of matchbook covers.

    People editors, showing how attuned they are to the young demographic, have given us teenagers and barely-20s TV ensembles. In 2008, the seven member cast of TV's "Gossip Girl" made the list. "On screen," People told us, "they are gorgeous, scheming, backstabbing high schoolers." Just what America needs. More future business executives and politicians. This year, the group was "The Girls of 90210," each of whom was identified by a short quote. One said she collects wigs; one said hair is her "security blanket"; one said she discovered and misused bronzers in the 10th grade; and one said she needs to constantly "pinch my cheeks" because she never blushes.

    The first few years, there was a fairly even split between men and women.

    This year's edition revealed that about three-fourths of all be?utiful people are women. One of those beautiful women, given a full page and a minimal quote, was Michelle Obama. Although the editors have become more socially conscious, minority representation in the list is minimal, and certainly not in even close proportion to the reality that one-third of the world's population are black and another third are Asian. In the United States alone, there are 45 million Hispanics.

    Five years after the first list came out, People recognized the elderly. Of course, the elderly were celebrities: Paul Newman, Faye Dunaway and Barbara Babcock. The following year, the "elderly" included 51-year-old Queen Silvia of Sweden and 61-year-old journalist Gloria Steinem, who should have been honored for being beautiful, but embarrassed by her inclusion on a list that is distinguished by hyperbole and ethnocentrism. This year's edition included a two-page color spread deep in the magazine for 40 celebrities, ten in each of the age categories of 20s, 30s, 40s and 50s. Obviously, the editors couldn't find any beautiful 60-year-old celebrities like Dolly Parton, Goldie Hawn, Bette Midler, Neil Diamond or Robert DeNiro; or 70-year-olds, like Bill Cosby, Rita Moreno, Marlo Thomas, Robert Redford or Quincy Jones; or 80-year-olds, like Tony Curtis, Neil Simon, Burt Bacharach, Tony Bennett and Sidney Poitier. The editors did find some real oldies. They put pictures of historical figures online, and asked readers to evaluate them as "hot" or "not hot."

    The two "historical hotties," first disclosed in 2009, were Nefertiti and Martha Washington.

    In 1994, the editors expanded their section to include expanded bodies. Trying to make us believe that People thought beauty came in different sizes and shapes, the editors claimed that 5-foot-11, 180-pound, size-14 model Emme was a beautiful person, representative of the "burgeoning large-size modeling industry." It's hard to explain to these anorexic editors that size 14 isn't fat, and that half of America's women are at least a size 14. Not wanting to set a trend, People made sure all of the next year's beauties were modishly thin. As in previous years, the current edition includes no large-size beauties, but it does include ads for Jenny Craig and Atkins diets, Medifast appetite suppressants, low-calorie Twinkies and cupcakes and fat-free Florida grapefruit.

    In 1994, after an incestuous five years of casting entertainers at more than three million subscribers, People widened its scope of inclusion. For the first time, it "elevated" four of their professional colleagues to anointed status - former journalist and Vice President Al Gore, a husband-wife documentary film team, an ABC "Wide World of Sports" interviewer and an NBC "Today Show" host.

    Teachers, social workers and medical researchers, no matter how beautiful, don't make the final cut. But they shouldn't worry about it. Neither do Miss America, Miss World, Mr. Universe or, for that matter, Miss Crustacean, Ocean City, New Jersey's, salty tribute to hermit crabs, and a spoof of the beauty contest that once inhabited next-door Atlantic City. Miss USA, however, for the first time in 20 years, did make the list, but wasn't a big enough celebrity to rate more than a thumbnail mug shot.

    To its credit, People editors, probably as an afterthought, might have been concerned about why none of us made the list. So, in 1993, the editors did what was expected of People editors - they went and found two cities in Kentucky - Lovely and Beauty - and awarded "booby prizes." Of the seven people, whose lives were each compressed into one paragraph, were three women and four men, all of them white. The following year, People found no beautiful "commoners," but in 1995, the editors searched their loading docks and found nine UPS drivers, all male, to feature in the "booby prize" section. Commoners haven't made the list for several years.

    Like all people, we in journalism tend to report about, are attracted to and understand people and ethnic group? that are like our own, or of which we are a part. For the most part, we are white, middle-class, sometimes even upper-class, college graduates who talk a lot about equality, but look, act and dress as if we are part of the establishment we report about. We determine the "newsworthiness" of a story and, equally important, we decide the standards for media coverage - whether source credibility or beauty. If we see only certain groups of people, we will report only about those people, leaving everyone else as invisible as the billions of people who weren't even considered. Indeed, it takes some ugly and very shallow people to think they can make up a list of the 100 most beautiful people in the world.

  

»


Walter M. Brasch is a university professor of journalism, social issues columnist, and the author of 17 books. His current book is "Sinking the Ship of State: The Presidency of George W. Bush," available from amazon.com, bn.com, and other stores. You may contact him through his web site, www.walterbrasch.com.

Comments

This is a moderated forum. Β It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

I anoint Truthout to stop

I anoint Truthout to stop promoting People magazine and make their own list of the Top 100 most beautiful people in the world as voted on my their readers :)

It would be funny if there

It would be funny if there weren't so many people in this country that actually pay attention to this non-sense. I suspect that none of these people subscribe to this site but it is amazing to me how much time and space is given to this sort of thing by the mass media.

The slick, shallow banality

The slick, shallow banality of this magazine is largely due to the fact that its format was basically designed by a computer. The fact of its success speaks volumes about the emotional state and the intelligence of the average American.

Speaks volumes about the

Speaks volumes about the fact that they make enough profit to make it a viable topic, not that a larger percentage of the population read it.

It would be great if one

It would be great if one could sell a magazine that celebrates People who give back..give a damn about humanity and helping!

Hm....you mean Susan Boyle

Hm....you mean Susan Boyle wasn't in this edition of People Magazine? As she sang I saw her as one of the most beautiful people I've ever laid eyes on....

Hell ya!

Hell ya!

i worked as a freelancer at

i worked as a freelancer at people mag in the 90's, i've also freelance worked at quite a number of other magazines equally and ridiculously self-absorbed and stupid...i really got an 'education' as to how these mags do their thing and make those 'important' choices of content and it would all be pretty comical if it wasn't that so many people read them and actually form opinions, views and make decisions based on them. i'd say that fact makes this type of media rather despicable and i'm happy to say i no longer freelance in this superficial and disgusting form of publishing. 'false media, we don't need it do we?!!'

So, stop already! Sometimes

So, stop already! Sometimes I wonder why websites such as Truthout devote so much time to these shallow stories, berating the banality of the People-mag type values, but giving them so much ink -- and a reprint of their cover, no less! I prefer to ignore them.

the people who buy people

the people who buy people buy it for just this kind of information.

this is what people magazine does, this is what people magazine is about.

one cannot--&, in fact, probably should not--expect more from people magazine.

one should just not buy it.

oh, how my leftist mother would burn out on the lumpen proletariat. me too. cos one other thing: it is condescending to not understand that this proletariat neither wants nor understands what they are buying. they do. when they dont want this kind of information, people magazine will die. nobody will buy it. the end.

of people magazine, anyway. the thing to do is create other avenues for more interesting information. build it & they will come. so help me, not all of people's readers, but some.

thats how to change the world. you cant expect the establishment to change it for you.

Superficial, slick, shallow,

Superficial, slick, shallow, self-impressed, but a huge amount of money is in this industry. I used to look at (one can't really say "read") People for light entertainment info, but lately I've found it even more vapid than usual. I recognize (as in, have heard of, know what the context is, etc.) fewer than I'd say one out of ten of the people in People these days. And the ones I do recognize are anorexic, trashy, or criminals, in the main. The uplifting stories of character and decency that used to be a regular feature are few and far between now, and the "spend on useless glitz" attitude goes from cover to cover. Yes, we can say "just don't read it," and I long ago dropped my subscription and rarely if ever buy it, but recall that in most outlets where it is sold People is among the more respectable of the media choices at the checkout counter. Meryl Streep's character in "The Devil Wears Prada" tries to give a justification for the fashion industry. I didn't fall for what she had to say, and I can't justify the values behind People magazine either.

My girlfriend was not on the

My girlfriend was not on the list. Thus it has no credibility.

Unfortunately, People

Unfortunately, People Magazine left millions of people off the list. Since when does money make a person beautiful? Hmmmmmm......

Actors were relegated to the

Actors were relegated to the lowest social level for a thousand years for little more reason than they now receive accolades. I wouldn't mind, but regan? for president? Cheer leader bush? I haven't read "People" but the ethnocentricity of US media supports "us and them" thinking. The Aryan model of history found popular expression in genocide. The Aryan model was succeeded by the Extreme Aryan model and now we are in ultra Europeanism- The Disney Chair of History, Aryanism cubed. This is a good reason to broaden our ideas of beauty before we're propelled into a Procrustean Bed.