Only released for a week now, it has already had 20,000 subscribers. However, it has many surrounding issues. Firstly, the company has made the website available by invitation-only. Another problem is that since fashion changes quickly, the inventory will become outdated possibly before the company breaks even on profit.

Conversely, to ensure first-rate service, they have made a reservation system to ensure that dresses will arrive on time for people who wish to wear them on a specific date. It also offers 24 hour returns, re-sizing offers and insurance for damage. Customers can also choose a “backup” for an additional $25. Outfits come with a “fit kit” comprised of double-sided tape, bra strap adjusters and deodorant stain removers.

Some designers hope that it will increase product awareness and people will eventually go out and buy the item. Others are just glad that during a recession they could wear the latest fashions for cheap and not have to store them in their closets never to be worn again.

I am awaiting my membership approval now. We’ll see how successful this is in the future as it opens up to the public. Stay tuned.

I fell in love with Fashion photojournalism in February 2008 when major designer Marc Jacobs launched a campaign promoting his name brand with celebrity endorsement Victoria Beckham appearing in his ads. However, her face was not present, not was the clothing (well shoes were) or the brand name. It was simply, her legs sticking out of a bag (pictured above).

I became a fan of Marc Jacobs whose work doesn’t focus on the stereotypically beautiful photography to sell his brand, but rather the quirky, blemishes of glamor. He gets attention by ordering his photographer, Juergen Teller, to capture a moment in the way most luxury brands would discard. For example, he used young actress Dakota Fanning for one of his ad campaigns and picked a very unflattering shot of her with her mouth wide open. I just adore the rebellious tactic and uniqueness that brands the Jacobs’ vision. He stands alone by not doing what he should be doing.

“Last week, a cross-dressing Houston senior was sent home because his wig violated the school’s dress code rule that a boy’s hair may not be “longer than the bottom of a regular shirt collar.” In October, officials at a high school in Cobb County, Ga., sent home a boy who favored wigs, makeup and skinny jeans. In August, a Mississippi student’s senior portrait was barred from her yearbook because she had posed in a tuxedo.”

I understand that, since the shootings at Columbine, there must be restrictions for dress codes at school to eliminate gangs and inappropriate themes. But I do NOT think that it is acceptable to discriminate by the clothing that exhibits freedom in personality. However, it would be realistically impossible to make criteria for what is acceptable and unacceptable because everyone has differing moral opinions about society’s standards and stereotypes. This is why many schools simply enforce a uniform policy, the easy way out.

My public high school in a tiny suburb of Pennsylvania enforced a uniform policy of khaki pants and golf polo shirts during my junior year. I really feel that it took away a great deal of my self-expression and had no purpose in my crimeless suburb, for it was clearly to inhibit expression and not for safety purposes. There was very minimal harassment and group formations prior to the uniform policy. I think it is because we were educated very young age to limit judgement in our lives by our elementary guidance counselor, Mr. Lavelle.

I think that education to learn acceptance and diversity is the answer. Most judgments are based on naivety, so knowledge has the power to defeat all. I think that from a young age children should be taught in schools issues regarding gender, sexuality, individuality and tolerance for all. Then we would live in a better place where freedom of expression would mean something more than words written on a piece of paper.

In today’s economic recession, people are shopping less.  So Vogue hosted their now annual party for shopping, Fashion’s Night Out, in September, kicking off New York Fashion Week.  Hosted by the editor-in-chief of Vogue, Anna Wintour, it was a night where tons of stores in New York City kept their doors open afterhours, offering cocktails served by celebrities and playing booming music, to revive the sport of shopping and increase spirits during a recession.  There were many special sales, free merchandise, and fundraising opportunities, such as a t-shirt (pictured on model above) that benefitted the National September 11 Memorial and Museum and the New York City AIDS Fund.  The event was also endorsed by non-fashionistas like Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg.

I was actually supposed to volunteer during the evening hours of the event, but had to cancel due to work-related scheduling.  However, I think that this was the greatest idea that has hit this city.  The chance to mix fashion, shopping, socializing and exploring New York City excites me for next year’s event, since it will now be an annual occurrence.  I’m sure it did wonders in the retail aspect and enlightened many people who may have thought they couldn’t buy themselves a little appreciation gift for working hard.

All fashion gurus and those who pretend to be nearly fainted when the release of The September Issue was announced. The September Issue is a documentary film by R.J. Cutler who exposes the working at the world’s most prominent fashion magazine, Vogue.  He shows the collaborative works of all members of the staff, including the extremely famous Anna Wintour and the behind the scenes genius Grace Coddington.  Not only does it show us the stressful and elaborate process of producing a magazine with such high standars in all aspects, it shows the making of the largest issue of a magazine ever created in history.

As a serious fan of Vogue in the past, present and future, I really enjoyed the film (top 10 of all times status).  I am, however, horrified by one aspect of it.  There is a scene where Grace Coddington is the ringleader of a gorgeous photo shoot.  She completes it and posts it in the lime-up for Anna Wintour’s approval for it to be released in the issue.  Anna rejects it.  All of the money, which averages to be about $150,000 per photo shoot, is wasted as well as the beautiful photographs never to been seen by the public (and really never if this movie never existed).  All because one person, Anna, did not see it fit to be in “her” magazine.

Anna Rejecting Photographs (Note: fast forward to 0:47).

Though I appreciate her editorial work and everything she has done for the magazine and the fashion industry, such as establishing celebrity covers and endorsing small-time unknown designers, I am appalled by the waste of money.  So much of that money could have gone elsewhere, a countless laundry list.  Worse yet, this happens daily from what we know about Vogue and the nonchalant reactions to the rejection.  I don’t understand why this happens.  This wouldn’t be a problem if the communication at Vogue was more adequate.  Why couldn’t the shoot be pre-approved and pre-sketched to make sure it passed the margin, so that if particular photos were not adequate, they could just be reshot on the spot?

I guess I’ll never have the fiscally-laissez attitude needed to work at Vogue…

Obviously opens countless doors to topics.  Especially when you have a lot of interests.  I love sports, poker, music from the 1960′s, ballet, and countless other things.  I could blog about issues that I am passionate about such as my future as a journalist or sexual freedom or teen suicide or bad parenting that leads to issues throughout a generation’s life (which is thankfully observed and not self-experienced).  But I have chosen my favorite topic to speak about that, believe it or not, faces countless issues in terms of freedom, finance and scrutiny every day: Fashion.

Though I thankfully can express myself well through verbal, written and nonverbal communication, others cannot.  They must rely on what their image tells others (unfortunately).  Similar to the way our actions and demeanor define us, I believe that our choices in appearance and attire define us just as strongly.  It is what makes us unique, expressive individuals who have the options of standing out or blending in, both of which can be good.  Also, we can change who we are and play with fashion, because it is NEVER CONCRETE.  There are no rules.  What else in life has no rules?

I am not advocating fashion in the way mainstream does with brand importance and hierarchy; I am appealing to it as an art, a sociological medium and a form of expression.  It has evolved over history as a status symbol of class to a free-form that anyone can interpret.  unfortunately, judgemental people abuse the art by forming opinions.  Both negative and positive opinions are bad for fashion; Fashion should only be interpreted by its meaning and statement, not its judgements.  This is an obstacle that I wish to tackle over my lifetime (more to come, I promise).

The issues. 

• Financially speaking, fashion is misinterpreted as couture and expensive labels and storefronts on Fifth Avenue.  As stated above, it is so much more.  True artists in the world of fashion know this because ‘style’ is the driving force, not expensive trends.
• Just as genders are told to act in the same way, they are told to look the same as well.  Fashion can be a breakthrough for genders…or personalities.
• As an art form: Fashion photojournalism has become its own field of employment now and truly enjoyable, but not taken to be as serious.
• The Fashion Industry is a multi-billion dollar industry and can make or break the world financially.

The horror flick, similar to the late 90′s Blair Witch Project, is about a couple who documents ghosts in their apartments with an everyday video camera.  The target audience was known off the bat to be directed towards young people, so producers had to come up with a way to cheaply sell the low-budget film.  According to Tad Friend, a writer from the New Yorker, “the science of marketing is determining which old movie your new movie is like” so that you can simply mimic those marketing techniques used previously if they were successful.  So Paranormal Activity producers imitated The Blair Witch Project, in an updated fashion.  In the late 90′s, The Blair Witch Project was talked about by young people and marketed by word of mouth.  Today, we don’t even need to rely on word of mouth, for we have “word of type”, with websites like Facebook and Twitter.

Consequently, Paranormal Activity was prescreened by select colleges, producing shocking (literally) results.  Young people were scared witless and self-marketed the film via the internet.  The film’s website urged for viewers to demand that the film come to theaters in their town and that is exactly what they did.  The rest is marketing history.

I think that this shows the strength of “word of type” and the importance of social networking sites, which obviously have cast a spell over society.  It was a brilliant endeavor to participate in “do-it-yourself marketing”, because it clearly worked.  I think now more films will copy this advertising format and set new standards for marketing movies.

However, this in no way helps media companies make money.  They still have online advertisements, but this only accounts for (I think) less than 50 percent in advertising spendings.  So how can the Internet news sources make money? Subscription.

The Wall Street Journal has been a subscription-based company for a while now and other publications strive to do the same.  NewsCorp chairman Rupert Murdoch, a money and power-hungry media mogul, wants to begin charging his readers for content from all of his newspapers.  He hopes to begin doing so by June 2010, but has been forced to delay charging for news.  It will be a difficult process to switch gears for online formats, but will have to happen eventually with some newspapers, like Murdoch’s, declining 81 percent in total revenue.

I think that this must be done because though news is a right for everyone, these media companies must have money to actually put forth the news, pay workers, and etc.  The worry is that people will stop reading news entirely when it switches to paid format and will only rely on websites without subscription-based content.  I think it will start off unsteadily at first, but when the only legitimate and reliable sources of news (i.e. not citizen journalism via Twitter) must be paid for, people will ultimately pay.  It will just be shaky at first.

Released exactly 2 years after the Kindle, B&N unleashed its version of e-readers, The Nook (pictured above).  Priced at the same $259 with the same $9.99 book purchases, it is almost identical to the Kindle and the Sony E-Reader.  However, the Nook has a color display screen and has the compatibility to preview any e-book when walked into a Barnes & Noble store.  Books can also be lent to friends for two weeks at any time.

This is just another example in a bigger issue that the world is slowly adjusting and adapting to the electronic world.  There is a fear that someday books, publishing houses, libraries, book stores, and etc. will be figments of our memories.  This is definitely bad for book publishing companies but I think that, in the long run, it will be for the better.  The anxiety of people with the change from tangible to intangible was the same as when the computer was first introduced years ago and when the Internet became a part of everyday lives.  I think it’s time to just accept the new way of life and adhere.  It’s not a bad thing that technology is expanding…

The prosecution, however, is quite problematic.  The testimony of the witnesses is questionable because so many years have passed and the defendant is so old that he could claim memory loss or never even end up serving his time if he passes.

However, the show will go on.  One of the victim’s surviving family members, the son of Dutch victim Teunis de Groot who appeared in court as well, simply wants the case to be public to alert the world of the wrongdoing and possibly gain justice against him.

If convicted, Mr. Boere will be removed from the number 6 slot on the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s most-wanted list, a list established by a Holocaust survivor with similar motives as de Groot’s son.

I’m sure that Mr. Boere will not leave the courtroom without some type of punishment, but the effictiveness of sentencing an 88-year-old man to life in prison is somewhat ridiculous to me.  Though he admits to feeling guilty about his past, I feel that the whole ordeal might be more than it’s worth. However, the attention that the case will receive might be worth it to the surviving family members of the victims and to raise awareness of the remains of surviving SS hitmen still at large.