You competence consider that with the new arise in veganism and environmental awareness, that fur would be deeply unfashionable.
But collect up this month’s duplicate of Vogue and you’ll find an advert claiming the conflicting is true.
Despite conform houses like Gucci, Michael Kors and Armani pledging to go fur-free, February’s book facilities a campaign by the International Fur Federation saying: ‘Fur Now And Forever’.
The full page advert – which is pronounced to be worth up to £20,000 – shows 3 models lounging back, dressed in several animal skins and furs.
And people aren’t happy about it.
Ben Williamson, comparison general media executive at Peta, has accused British Vogue of allowing ‘this vicious attention prowl in by the back doorway by advertising’, while others have called for a protest of the magazine.
Boo, Vogue. Fur is not conform 👎 pic.twitter.com/tVSw1Q4guH
— Bee Wakefield (@Bee_Wakefield) Jan 8, 2018
‘WTF Cancelling Vogue subscription immediately. we don’t support the fur trade in any form! Disgusted that my subscription includes this sh*t,’ writes another former fan.
It’s an peculiar move, deliberation that British Vogue has had a long-term anathema on using fur in its photo shoots.
During Alexandra Shuman’s reign, fur very frequency seemed in the repository – heading some people to doubt new editor Edward Enninful’s opinion towards the industry.
no way! That’s shocking. Especially after Gucci for instance announcing no some-more fur. Seems utterly out of touch.
— Kyle Galvin (@kylegalvin_) Jan 11, 2018
@Edward_Enninful SHAME on you for permitting a full page widespread compelling fur in @BritishVogue 👎🏻 positively disgusting. Would you wear the fur of your dog?!
— sophie. (@sophiekatetw) Jan 10, 2018
@BritishVogue copy an advert for fur is reprehensible. Further proof that practice under @Edward_Enninful is zero but a vulgar, chavvy publication
— Katie Bates (@prometheus3) Jan 10, 2018
But it’s worth indicating out that there’s mostly a Chinese wall between editorial and blurb teams in such organisations so the odds of him having any major lean over which ad campaigns win space is utterly slim.
It’s some-more bad form from Conde Nast as a whole.
Perhaps it’s some-more a case of stacks of income never going out of fashion.