People Are Talking

Morley Safer, Snarky Fashion Commentator?

Ralph+Lauren+Front+Row+Fall+09+MBFW+2N0zF-VjIpJl.jpg.jpegHonestly, one of the things that we found most revealing from Anna’s long-awaited 60 Minutes interview is that Morley Safer seems to be a bit of a hater.

Not of Anna, per se, but the fashion world in general.

We understand this is not his normal beat. But sit downs with the likes of Nicolas, Karl, and Galliano are not handed out lightly…and should be respected, Mr. Safer.

His voice-overs were way snarky. Deriding Karl for choosing what he called the “Dracula look” this season and stating that Galliano looks like he needs a better tailor!

Morley, what did the fash flock do to make you so surly?

On a separate note, from now on we will rather enjoy thinking of Anna as a doctor doling out stoic medical analysis at 4 Times Square, per Andre’s comparison. Hanging up layouts like x-rays and slicing up stories, hiding all personal emotion from her scared patients, er, editors.

What did you guys think of the piece?

Comments

1

posted by vansant2625

May 17, 2009 9:10PM

It was highly obvious that Morley was not the right one to comment on Wintour's behavior and the industry in general.

Sure he did his thing by asking tough questions but it was like he was talking down to Wintour by essentially asking, Who cares about your little publication??

avatar
2

posted by guest

May 17, 2009 10:13PM

damn it! i missed it. anyone know when/if it's gonna rerun?

3

posted by Jean Voltaire

May 17, 2009 10:47PM

Completely forgot it was even on tonight! I'll have to catch a video post on YouTube (hopefully!)

avatar
4

posted by guest

May 17, 2009 11:20PM

hmmm, maybe AIG and Iraq are more serious issues and deserve more gravity and a more respectful tone. i suppose the point of anna's interview is to show the relevance of fashion, Vogue and Anna herself to the world in the current bleak economic climate where everyone's buzz word is 'cutting back'

and its the first time i have watched 60 minutes in years, i wonder if we will know if ratings went up.

and there are bonus clips on 60 minutes site. its better than what they showed on tv IMO. you can also watch the actual interview as well.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/17/60minutes/main5021270.shtml

avatar
6

posted by guest

May 17, 2009 11:37PM

I totally agree with Abby. I was really shocked that Morley seemed to have no respect for any of the designers that have shaped the landscape of fashion today.

He did his job but he was definitely not the right person to provide suitable ot accurate commetary on what was being shown on screen. Clearly he was given the wrong assignment.

Also funny that if issues in Iraq and the AIG bailout are considered more "interesting" and "relevant" it was a story about "a little fashion publication" that 60 minutes chose as it's anchor segment which is a spot usually reserved for a story that fits just those two descriptors.

avatar
7

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 12:31AM

I think that a journalist should always endeavor to treat his subject with respect. Here, however, perhaps Safer felt the need to snarkify his piece since the majority of Americans might question the relevance of a 12-minute piece on a fashion editor instead of, y'know, the economy or Afghanistan or something more salient.

avatar
8

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 12:38AM

i'm #4 and I never said iraq or AIG were more interesting but they are certainly much more serious subjects that few people are flippant about. whereas it is unfortunate but true that many people consider fashion frivolous. this isn't my opinion but it is a prevalent thought. i am far more interested in vogue myself or i wouldn't be reading this site.

safer is clearly clueless about fashion but its not shocking that a journalist from 60 minutes doesn't give much respect to this story. other than andy rooney, no one really has style :P also, it appeared as if his entire background research was reading the spoiler for devil wears prada. but has anyone thought about the fact that few people who are actually involved in and understands the fashion industry would want to interview anna wintour? like how many people will go on record and suggest that she is said to be worse than miranda priestly?

9

posted by Jean Voltaire

May 18, 2009 1:31AM

Ok is anyone else's skin up?

avatar
10

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 1:42AM

If you watch 60 Minutes regularly, Morley is always a hater. Though it was shocking the biting comments he made about Galliano and Arnault especially. his would have been a better piece for Leslie Stahl or i hate to say it, even Katie Couric.

avatar
11

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 2:41AM

this documentary was totaly not cool. i cannot belive how disrespectful this interview came off.. it was giving the idea to the non fashion people in the US that the fashion industry is frivilous and ridiculous. it makes all of the peoples hard work seem un validated. i hated it. it did not support the industry it made a joke and mockery out of it.. THUMBS WAY DOWN

12

posted by austinsamuel

May 18, 2009 5:43AM

I love how she admitted she made Oprah go ano, and commissioned that piece on obesity. She does what it takes, and i admire her for that.

avatar
13

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 7:18AM

missed it. anyone have a link to watch it online??

avatar
14

posted by andremichael

May 18, 2009 9:12AM

I must say that I loved the alexander wang Fall 09 preview cameo.

alex: "it retails at $1200"
anna: "oh that's reasonable.."

& i'll also say that 60 Minutes knows their audience. & 2 the quintessential 60 Minutes viewer, their view of fashion IS frivolous & unimportant. so the fashion folks like us must understand that, disregard that Morley man & appreciate this piece for what it is: a candid Anna speaking on what she does best.

avatar
15

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 9:40AM

Thanks for the outtakes link,# 4.
I thought they provided a better overall view of Vogue and Anna.
The editing of the final piece did seem to take the tone of 'Devil wears Prada'. While I didn't expect Morley Safer to be fawning all over Wintour, he was really snarky about Galliano and Lagerfeld, which I thought was uncalled for. They were merely providing some additional context on American Vogue and Wintour's influence on fashion(although my preference is Paris Vogue, sorry!).

If snark is where 60 minutes is going in coverage of stories, I wish they'd been more snarky with some of the AIG people. After all, the fashion industry didn't cause this economic collapse; AIG on the other hand....(sorry about getting all political on this thread!)

avatar
16

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 9:42AM

If this is not 60 minutes audience material, then what was the point of doing this in the first place? I found him to be quite rude and degrading toward the things that people in the industry look up to and admire. "Rock horror, dracula, and calling Anna Piaggi a name was just uncalled for.

Following Anna in NY, Milan, and Paris to release a 13 minute segment seemed to have been a HUGE waste of money. Follow her to Paris or NY and leave it at that....many of those interviews were so short and weren't really about her per se, rather what she could do for someone.

At first I was disappointed that it was so short and after watching it, I am glad it wasn't any longer. Huge FAIL 60 Minutes.

avatar
17

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 9:58AM

Keeping the 60 Minutes audience in mind, I thought the piece was good. It was a rare inside look at Vogue and fashion, and I thought Safer's presentation of Wintour herself and his questions for her showed a great deal of respect.

Side note, also loved the Alex Wang cameo and the Kaiser's comment that running a fashion magazine is akin to running a madhouse.

avatar
18

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 10:01AM

It was a good piece. Do you expect no one ever to report on Ms Wintour except those in the fashion industry?...nothing can be written or said about her unless it's carefully fawning? That's just childish.
Morley is a journalist, and he was unbiased and candid. I adore all of the subjects of the editorial as much as you all do, but I'm not bent out of shape and hurt by Morley's reporting....I doubt Anna was either.

avatar
19

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 10:28AM

The holier-than-thou mentality that Vogue consistently disperses on the fashion industry-small designers, other publications and just the general public in general in terms of the content in their magazine is much harder to swallow than the snarky tone of the interviewer, it's about damn time Anna got a taste of her own medicine. Fashion is important but in the big scheme of what is happening in the world, it is minute and frivolous. Not to say there is anything bad about being either. Yes Vogue has done tons for American fashion and has undoubtedly carved the paths of designers, socialites and other misc people she found worthy but on the flip side, the hordes of other talented ppl she has shunned cannot be ignored. In her mind, fashion is exclusive. She doesn't necessarily include the ppl that are the most talented but more so, the people that kiss her ass the most. This woman may be talented and have a discerning eye but it is less than fair and a lot of the time, highly obnoxious. Vogue may be a "glamorous girlfriend" if that girlfriend was a reigning bitch with a boring haircut.

avatar
20

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 10:33AM

I totally agree with commenter 18 & I overall liked the piece. It was an unbiased view from a non-fashion perspective. Also, I have a new love and respect for Anna.

avatar
21

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 11:23AM

I can't figure out WHY Anna said yes to 60 minutes...of all the reporters to grant the interview to...the demographic, the perspective, the length of the piece...it seemed so off...

22

posted by astralgirl02

May 18, 2009 11:36AM

I absolutely agree with commenter #19... it's time for everyone to stop fawning over that old, sad bag of bones and her magazine that does nothing but prop up her socialite friends, and get real. Let's profile the next generation of fashion editors that really are influential to the streets, including Emmanuelle Alt, Kate Lanphear, and the obviously amazing CARINE.

avatar
23

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 11:43AM

I was ok with the somewhat snarky tone but pushing "The Devil Wears Prada" as a comparison to everything got really old, really quickly. If he wanted to be more critical, why didn't he seek out some of the designers/models/photographers/etc. who aren't featured in Vogue?

avatar
24

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 11:47AM

I actually find Vogue profiles more nauseating (why I look at the pictures instead). It's all about kowtowing and syrupy mutual admiration. Fashion is fun, creative and stuff, but it is also, like many other fields, filled with incredibly narcissistic, even ridiculous, people. Why shouldn't someone poke a hole in their enormous egos and point out that occasionally, the emperor has no clothes.

avatar
25

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 12:32PM

I think Morley views fashion as most of the world, not as an insider. HAted the graphic face shots, as we are all about looking at the head-to-toe presentation. The st ory gives hope to drop-outs with prestigious father figures. no?

avatar
26

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 12:32PM

I love fashion more than most and attend couture and ready to wear religiously in Paris, London and Milan and sit across from Ms Wintour often. Having said that I thought that the piece was solid but unrevealing.
Lets face it to the untrained unaccustomed eye Lagerfeld does look like he is dressed as Dracula and Arnault's tailoring looked well more like tailoring than Galliano's-at least he wasn't wearing a spacesuit.
Whilst were on the subject of The Devil Wears Prada did anyone see that the offices of Miranda Priestly was almost identical to that of Wintour ?

Lastly how much collagen has she pumped into those lips?

avatar
27

posted by etoilee8

May 18, 2009 12:51PM

Call me crazy but I loved the piece. Yeah some of Safer's comments were definitely unnecessary but for the most part, I thought he asked all the questions a journalist should ask.

avatar
28

posted by fauvism3

May 18, 2009 1:03PM

Thankfully commenters 18 & 20 got it right...it was an excellent piece and by no means offensive, unless you take yourself and fashion SO goddamn seriously that you are offended he pokes fun at Karl Lagerfeld's personal style or John Galliano's sometimes oversize garments.

BFD!!!!!!

avatar
29

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 1:12PM

I thought the main problem with the piece was that it was all sound bites. You never got the real picture of the fashion industry. You never got the real picture of fashion week. You probabaly didn't get a real picture of Vogue. It was a conglomeration of short interviews and one-second images without any background on what they were showing.

The media has always butchered fashion. Safer took the easy route by touting the same stereotype of fashion that prevails in the eyes of the public. It should have been obvious that he would somehow mention emaciated models and $1200 price tags, even though those topics were not what the interview was about. It should have been obvious that he was going to deride Karl and Anna Piaggi and Galliano based solely on their style. He chose to take the job of an outsider critic, not a serious journalist engaged in his work. He chose to work with a stereotype instead of an unbiased view on his subject.

To be fair, if there is anything that comes close to the mass media's portrayal of fashion, it is Anna Wintour and Vogue. They play up the luxery aspect of fashion over the art aspect of fashion. They play up the celebrity and the exclusivity. If anyone in the fashion industry deserved to be made fun of, it was Wintour. All the same, that doesn't make up for the fact that they tried to portray her as the embodiment of all those in the fashion industry, when she is in fact their opposite.

The segment was poorly done, overall. You learned nothing new. You learned nothing interesting. It was just the mass media trying to deride the fashion industry, yet again. I wonder when this is going to change...

30

posted by RashomonRebel

May 18, 2009 1:25PM

Yea, my interview with Anna was way better.

#22's picture cracks me up!

avatar
31

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 1:30PM

I loved Safer's comments...c'mon. He didn't say anything that others in the fashion world have *thought* many times. Whatever you thought of his comments, I have to admit that he did a great job of making Anna Wintour likeable. She actually came across as someone less scary, and more human that her usual public persona.

32

posted by Pretty Young Thing

May 18, 2009 1:32PM

I agree with 28. It was a great piece! Morley was hardly rude- his jokes were actually quite spot-on. Most Americans watching the program would agree with his style commentary. I was laughing as I was glued to the screen. It was unbiased and I'm glad he didn't worship at their feet. And they made Anna seem quite likable, I love her even more now. I've come to realize that she's upholding Vogue as the elegant queen of magazines (no matter how dated a notion that is) to maintain its integrity, as that has always been the way American Vogue rolls. It is pristine, top-of-the-line, and always beautiful. And I am glad that 60 Minutes was able to portray this image accurately.

And Guest #29, of course Morley should have mentioned "emaciated models and $1200 price tags"- does Anna not deal with such things? Are they relevant to fashion? Obviously, therefore they deserve mentioning in the report. Adding such kept the report from being one-dimensional. And everyone needs to calm down- just because he wasn't proclaiming everyone a creative genius doesn't mean he was being stereotypical- he was being real.

avatar
33

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 1:37PM

To guest #29, it wasn't supposed to be a piece about the fashion industry, it was a piece about Anna Wintour.

avatar
34

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 3:09PM

Did anyone else think that "Models who seem as angry as they are emaciated" was f*ing hilarious?!?!?
Also, to everyone complaining about Morley being snarky, I guess you don't watch 60 minutes regularly. He's not just that way to Anna Wintour but to everyone, it's been his reporting style for almost 40 years. Did you really think a man like that has something against fashion? It was an assignment like any other. It's only a big deal to us fashion fans.

avatar
35

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 4:02PM

Seriously?! Journalism doesn't have to be fawning and smarmy to be "respectful". Fashion journalism in general often suffers from its unwillingness to risk sacrilege by criticizing the high saints of the rag trade. So why shouldn't a reporter who's not in thrall to the diktats of the fashion industry - never mind a reporter with decades of experience and credibility, and a voice of his own - poke a little fun at Karl and cie?
In some circles, an interview with 60 Minutes is considered an honour... not the other way around.

avatar
36

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 4:28PM

Maybe those of you at Fashionista couldn't appreciate the 60 Minutes piece because it's a foray into well-researched and objective journalism, devoid of the incessant bias and poor quality of writing that typifies the "journalism" practiced here.

And like someone before me stated, it's an honor to be featured on 60 Minutes. Wintour should wringing her own neck in excitement for the new wave of exposure she's getting, seeing as how American Vogue's been down the shithole going on several years now.

avatar
37

posted by guest

May 18, 2009 4:40PM

I wasnt sure about the dracula comment either! still it was nice to see 60 minutes do a piece on Anna as she is so mysterious it was good to watch the interview although i dont feel like i learned a whole lot either : (

Venetia
www.VenetiaJewelry.etsy.com

avatar
38

posted by guest

May 19, 2009 1:59AM

some commenters are so full of it and reinforce the stereotype that fashionistas are superficial, materialistic, exclusive and elitist. i mean, chill the eff out! mr. safer is like this in most of his interviews and any unbiased outsider WOULD think karl is an oddball just based on looks. i mean, seriously...

avatar
39

posted by guest

May 19, 2009 2:11PM

I also agree that it was just a weird interview to have on 60 minutes. Maybe if it was right after The Devil Wears Prada (book or movie) came out. Or maybe just after Meryl Streep won the Oscar. But now? In this economy? During a war? And to not do anything with the segment besides, "Look, this high-fashion world exists." Ta da? Weird.

Of course, us fashion types loved it, but for everyone else, Morley did a terrible research job. Saying that Karl was sporting a Dracula look "this season" - not accurate, or nice. And the Galliano comment was just strange. As if all these creative designers still need to personally dress from Brooks Brothers no matter what they send down the runway??

I enjoyed seeing how spot on The Devil Wears Prada got Anna's office, but other than that, it was totally irrelevant.

avatar
40

posted by guest

May 19, 2009 4:37PM

Please, wake up. Karl Lagerfeld and John Galliano look ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS, regardless of how excellent they are at their craft. 60 Minutes is a national news show and, believe it or not, life exists outside NYC, London, Milan and Paris. I love fashion. It's fun, creative, etc. But its completely frivolous; so don't take offense when it's portrayed as being just that. Go pick up a NY Times or something...

avatar
41

posted by guest

May 20, 2009 3:20AM

As much as I felt the bias on the piece, I will be watching. I think that while Anna may seem cold, that's part of what the job entails. I think that this piece showed a small slice of her vulnerability, which is good to see in a woman of such stature. I'll be sure to record it.
However, I will mention I am quite disappointed in the way 60 Minutes approached this piece. There is some definite negativity toward the fashion industry, and while it might not be a subject of urgent political nature, it still is fascinating. I hope that the piece that airs will be wonderful. I hope. (:

42

posted by darcykins

May 20, 2009 10:23AM

I love Morley Safer, he's done Canada proud.

avatar
43

posted by guest

May 20, 2009 12:06PM

I completely agree, I was appalled at how he criticized Lagerfeld's look as "the dracula look" and mentioned that Galliano was in need of a better tailor.
HES GALLIANO,
that's all
x

Post Your Comment