Publisher of Mishpacha magazine explaining no-pics

amother

Cobalt

Sun, Nov 26 2023, 7:35 am

amother Blush wrote:

Because their circulation will go down if they put in pics of women. Period.

Chassidim have the numbers and their leadership will not allow them to purchase the magazine if it has pics of women.

The magazines are part of a very lucrative industry. It’s always about the bottom line.

Good for them. Nothing wrong with having your own standards.

There's plenty of magazines in the world, different strokes for different folks.
End of.

wigboutique

Sun, Nov 26 2023, 7:40 am

The no pictures thing doesn’t bother me. It provides a focus on the stories, not the image around it. I think it has a very Jewish background to it. And I am younger and more “modern” than most orthodox individuals (albeit with an appreciation and respect for tradition and Halacha)
It’s like people who appreciate looks more than the internal qualities of a person. You can also make the comparison of someone into brands versus actual style. What’s the point? It’s hollow.
Thank you Mishpacha for adhering to these values.
My two cents. Feel free to agree to disagree

shabbatiscoming

Sun, Nov 26 2023, 7:43 am

wigboutique wrote:

But it does have pictures, of men. Just not of women. 🤔

chestnut

Sun, Nov 26 2023, 8:12 am

amother Valerian wrote:

There have been many pictures of women lately in the Mishpacha. There have been pics of hostages, there was an article about the lady who supported Torah (Jennie something) with many pictures, and other places as well.

Magazine or online?

gootlfriends

Sun, Nov 26 2023, 8:16 am

I honestly don't care either way but I think the world forgets what modesty actually is. I recently was reading a magazine in monsey with zero pictures of women but the ads still had inappropriate content. And it goes to show that people have forgotten how to live.

amother

Clear

Sun, Nov 26 2023, 8:17 am

amother Tuberose wrote:

about three weeks ago mishpacha had a small picture of a hostage, a teenage girl dressed in a low cut tank top. I didn't mind it but I have chassidish relatives who were disturbed. there is no reason that a man reading a frum magazine has to have that jump out at him where he doesn't expect it. (while walking on streets he does expect it and is careful)
He sent mishpacha a letter and they apologized and said it was an oversight.
I still think it was on purpose because they seem to be slipping it in wherever they can...

I hope people are more disturbed by the fact that there are hostages than abt whether or not a picture of one in a tank top was published. It probably was an oversight but remember that in a time when people are ripping down hostage photos we should not be advocating for anything that sends a message we render them invisible as well. JMHO.

amother

Clear

Sun, Nov 26 2023, 8:21 am

chestnut wrote:

Magazine or online?

In the print magazine. For example, the issue about Jennie Miller included a full family photo of R' Kamenetzky (visiting her as an older lady) so clearly R Kamenetzky/his family gave permission and is ok with pics of women being published, Rebbetzin Kamenetzky as a young woman + their daughters as young girls were in the photo.

They got great feedback about that article and apparently the author is now working on a book about Jennie Miller, so I assume most of their readership took it in stride and were pleased to see photos or at least didn't mind enough to complain.

amother

Blueberry

Sun, Nov 26 2023, 8:32 am

amother Tuberose wrote:

I think in such a case the magazine could slightly blur the body part that's not tznius. I think it fine to blur the body part if they have a very expose top-like a tank top or very open neck.

I don't know if it's like that way still. I'm chasidish hamoidea magazine had no pictures of women. To the point that a family picture in the coloring section showed no mother or girls. To me that looked like a gay family. I decided the newspaper was for very closed -mined people. Unsiscribed. If they couldn't include a sister in the children's section this newspaper was not for me. My children play with their boy next door neighbors and cousins up until they are about 9 years old. They are then told they could talk to their but not touch them. They end up being disinterested even before that age. We are all very chasidish. Men that can't even look at women. Will treat women bad if they have to interact with them its fanatic.

amother

Tuberose

Sun, Nov 26 2023, 10:10 am

amother Clear wrote:

thats fine, of course they should be putting pictures of the hostages. but putting one in a tank top when there are nebach 240 others wasn't necessary.

amother

Aqua

Sun, Nov 26 2023, 10:32 pm

amother Clear wrote:

Sorry, but this is being ridiculously closed-minded. You have no idea what kind of negative feedback they got for this which they're wisely not sharing with their readers.

amother

Clear

Sun, Nov 26 2023, 10:37 pm

amother Aqua wrote:

Sorry, but this is being ridiculously closed-minded. You have no idea what kind of negative feedback they got for this which they're wisely not sharing with their readers.

Since they've continued to include pictures of women, it's pretty obvious the positive reaction was greater than any negative feedback they may have received. If they had lost business or been overwhelmed with negative feedback they would have stepped back from publishing similar photos. As has already been pointed out on this thread, whether or not to publish photos has always been a business decision and their business is doing fine even once they started to include them. (Side point, but the term "close minded" means something different than the meaning you are ascribing to it, anyway...it doesn't work in that context.)

LovesHashem

Sun, Nov 26 2023, 11:07 pm

amother Tuberose wrote:

Even in they were trying to slip in pictures they would not put something like that in. All of the graphics and production is done from Israel, and everyone was I'm sure very shaken up and emotional and last minute.....

amother

Ebony

Sun, Nov 26 2023, 11:27 pm

amother Blueberry wrote:

They have been printing pictures with little girls up to around age 7 for many years now.
Also the hamodia doesnt have such a page