Magazines

The Times They Are A-Changing

Conde-Nast-Building-NY4.jpgJohn Koblin over at the Observer has what I consider to be a great and quite amusing piece on the ever-changing corporate culture over at 4 Times Square.

Graydon’s now eating in the cafeteria! It’s hard to find a seat in our in-house spot designed by a world-renowned architect! There’s no more shrimp at the salad bar or Orangina in the fridge!

I know, it’s mind-blowing the things people are having to deal with over there. But such is life in a shitty economy. The manner to which they have become accustomed makes every shift feel so much more massive. And of course, there will surely be many more substantive changes when the McKinsey consultants have turned in their final analysis.

As one source in the story said, “That whole feeling of working here and it being cushy and other people loving it and being jealous? That’s kind of gone now.”

And honestly, while it’s definitely time for Condé Nast to catch up to the reality most of us have been living in for some time and start to tighten the budgets, it makes me a little bummed out too. It’s always stood glamorously apart from the rest of the publishing world. And for a while back in 2001, I got to enjoy its bounty. This was a time when you could send someone in a town car to Connecticut for Powerball tickets for the edit staff. Ridiculous? Certainly. But kind of badass too.

Because really even when you’re ridiculing some of its more glaring absurdities, there’s always an underlying jealousy that all of us can certainly cop to.

Do you think Condé will ever return to its true Condé-ness again?

Comments

1

posted by RashomonRebel

Aug 12, 2009 12:59PM

Graydon was looking for the $50 mac and cheese.

avatar
2

posted by guest

Aug 12, 2009 1:05PM

God Abby I'm really not trying to nitpick, but I'm not seeing how sending a town car to CT for Powerball tickets is in any way "badass." I think the word you're looking for is "assy." And shouldn't playing Powerball have been beneath such spoiled ninnies in the first place?

Also: "there’s always an underlying jealousy that all of us can certainly cop to."

All should really be "some." Scratch "always" while you're at it.

Seriously, some of us couldn't care less, now or then.

3

posted by Jean Voltaire

Aug 12, 2009 1:10PM

Fantastic piece. From what I took from it was the ridiculous amount of excess expenses. The part regarding the exclusion of The New Yorker also made me wonder what the relationship Newhouse has with the editor.

PS - Anna must be pulling her hair out!

avatar
4

posted by guest

Aug 12, 2009 1:28PM

perks are what successful, profitable companies give their employees. hmmm, maybe expecting the company to pay for a town car to go to another state to buy powerball tickets is part of the reason conde is no longer as succesful and your fellow friends/magazine employees may end up unemployed.

5

posted by Abby Gardner

Aug 12, 2009 1:34PM

That level of financial freedom at a company is, to me, rather badass. But badass does not necessarily mean smart. Of course, it's exactly that kind of recklessness that plays a huge part in where they are today. But who wouldn't have taken advantage of the perks when they were put in front of you?

And for the record, I assert that playing the lottery is never not fun.

avatar
6

posted by guest

Aug 12, 2009 1:42PM

Hey Abby, I like the lottery too. I would just expect it to be beneath the type of people who would so easily waste resources to send a town car out of state to buy them.

"Badass" to me means outlaw behavior, something subversive or daring to be admired (if not copied). Isn't the "level of financial freedom" that would allow such a wasteful and silly rather foolish and sad in hindsight, especially as magazines tank left and right? I love perks as much as the next girl, but doing something unnecessary simply because you can isn't a perk -- it's immature and embarrassing. Well, it would embarrass me, anyway.

Maybe you had to be there. :)

avatar
7

posted by guest

Aug 12, 2009 2:03PM

I know our culture at this point has become French Revolution-esque, where bashing frivolity is fashionable, but in all fairness, the publishing world is not Wall St. It wasn't blowing money it didn't have; it was one of many industries that was profitable. I began my career as a makeup artist with Dior several years ago in my hometown. The company paid for a rental car-a nice one-for three days, so that I could drive up to Novi, MI, a very wealthy suburb, stay in a tres posh hotel, eat from a gorgeous spread three times a day, and walk away from the training seminar with a full bottle of J'Adore fragrance (the 3.4 size). And they did all of this because they could afford to! People were on a John Galliano high-they loved that the compacts every season mirrored what they saw on the runways. I am assuming, since Fashionista.com was just comparing the number of advertising pages in VOGUE just two years ago, that Conde Nast could afford to spoil their employees with their profits, and I for one would love to see a return to those days. It's not about exclusivity, it's about generosity.

xoxo,
http://KateDarling.Blogspot.com

8

posted by deathofadame

Aug 12, 2009 3:03PM

I would've hopped in that car quick to for a ride to CT just to pick up lottery tickets! hell yea!!!

http://vinesteet.blogspot.com/

avatar
9

posted by guest

Aug 12, 2009 3:05PM

a. That is pretty badass and I really wish this recession would be over so that we can go back to the days of badass perks.
b. I don't really think we need to define what badass means and then see if it applies to the way it was used--this isn't english class, get over yourself.
c. #2: Why did you take the time to explain to us all the reasons you don't give a shit, unless you really do give a shit and you really are jealous.
d. I can't wait to move to New York after college, hopefully the fashion world goes back to the way it was sometime in the next two years so that I too can have the experience of being shipped off to CT just to get a powerball ticket.

avatar
10

posted by guest

Aug 12, 2009 3:26PM

I think the good ole days are over for Conde, and rightly so! They contributed to this recession mess to begin with - encouraging low wage-earners to spend spend spend with their glossy photos and ads, making them believe that they too can have it all. Now the jig is up, and I'm glad they're getting what's coming to them

avatar
11

posted by guest

Aug 12, 2009 3:28PM

#9, did you miss the part where I said "badass means to ME"? So I care about definitions -- sue me. If I need a Powerball ticket I'm sure I can get one without spending the company dime, so I'm not sure what there is to be jealous of. We're not talking about free clothes here.

Good luck with the whole graduating and moving here thing.

avatar
12

posted by guest

Aug 12, 2009 3:51PM

#7 - Nicely put.

#10 - If you want something to blame for the recession you should be ragging on house shopping not shoe and purse shopping.

avatar
13

posted by guest

Aug 12, 2009 4:52PM

#2 if you don't care then why take the time to comment?
and, hello, der, the town car to ct for a powerball ticket was for over-the-top-effect as to the ridiculousness of the budgets at conde nast. truth: the editors in chief at conde nast have their housing (mortage/rent) paid for as part of their contracts.

avatar
14

posted by guest

Aug 12, 2009 5:20PM

#13, I was saying I didn't care enough about the perks to be jealous. I did find Abby's post interesting, as I work in publishing myself (not fashion-related).

As to your other point, those of us who didn't do such frivolous and wasteful things (or work in industries that condoned it) probably still have our jobs. Conde can't even afford receptionists anymore, so you see how well such ridiculous worked out for them.

15

posted by Belle de Jour

Aug 12, 2009 9:11PM

When I worked at In Style, we'd send interns home in town cars. Trust me-those bills add up!

I think it's good that publishing in scaling back. I for one am happy to see a bit of return to normalcy.

avatar
16

posted by guest

Aug 13, 2009 9:08AM

Bravo, Abby, Bravo. If we took the recession so effing seriously all the time, we'd JUMP from 4 Times Square.

Let's all lighten up, ladies, and maybe have a piece of fruit. And do we really need to analyze the connotation of the word 'badass'?? Really?? Perhaps some of you need a hobby, and nitpicking your superior wish-she-was-my-best-friend-in-real-life editor (that's exactly what you were doing, Guest 2, oh worldly, anonymous, green-with-envy poster) doesn't count as a hobby.


Corrina

avatar
17

posted by guest

Aug 13, 2009 10:59AM

Corinna, I agree that Abby is pretty rad, although unless I'm working for her I can't see how she is my "superior." I'm an editor myself. Word analyzing is what I do. And "badass" happens to be one of my favorite words, so its usage interests me.

Trust, I'm not green with envy. I know magazines can be glamorous but I love my job just fine.

It really isn't so serious that I disagreed with Abby. Some of you are serious over-reactors and seem in need of a job yourselves.

18

posted by Abby Gardner

Aug 13, 2009 11:06AM

It's all good! Whether or not we use badass in the same way or disagree on the reckless use of town cars :) xxA

avatar
19

posted by guest

Aug 13, 2009 11:14AM

You're the bomb Abby :D

avatar
20

posted by guest

Aug 13, 2009 12:59PM

i agree #19, she is the bomb! (haven't used that word in a while).

conde nast is always sort of the fantasy that all (or maybe just me) dream of being able to partake in. hopefully conde will go back to that because even though people are saying shit they are just as envious as the rest of us :)

Post Your Comment