Magazines | Print Media

Out Magazine Gets a Refresh

Out_november

Everything old is new again over at Out magazine as the 14-year-old publication gets its latest refresh.

Editor-in-chief Aaron Hicklin (formerly of BlackBook) took the helm of the magazine a few months ago and his editorship is beginning to bear some fruit, the latest being this hot-off-the-press redesign (a bit retro, perhaps?) which should start showing up on newsstands later this week. Cover guy is Jamie Dornan, Calvin Klein model/actor who plays boytoy to Marie Antoinette in the latest Sofia Coppola film.

Incidentally, there's a great new remix of Bow Wow Wow's "I Want Candy" from the same film floating around. You can pick it up here or here if it's still up.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Way to kick off a new chapter of a gay magazine -- with a straight coverboy.

    Posted by: David | Oct 9, 2006 5:57:52 PM


  2. That (title) font is atrocious.
    And the little white url below it looks lame.

    Posted by: CF | Oct 9, 2006 6:38:18 PM


  3. I wish that Out, as well as The Advocate and Genre and most other gay mags would realize that the problem isn't with the design, it's with the content. Why do all gay mags have to be so shallow? Why can't we have stories longer that a page? Why can't we have stories a little more in depth? Why all the noxious celbrity coverage? The straight cover models and celebrities are just the tip of the iceburg when it comes to why gay magazines are so bad.

    Posted by: Daniel | Oct 9, 2006 7:06:23 PM


  4. You said it, Daniel! I should pay money for cheesy crap? Ha!

    Posted by: jjabely | Oct 9, 2006 7:11:43 PM


  5. It's a *magazine*.

    The mere fact that they attempt to appeal to a demographic as vast & vague as "gay" means it's going to de facto be shallow. Alcohol ads and celebrity coverage for EVERYONE.

    The design of the cover still sucks, though. Doesn't look like a homosexual did the layout.

    Posted by: CF | Oct 9, 2006 7:30:35 PM


  6. To be honest, I haven't looked inside an issue of OUT in about a year. I used to subscribe, but found that I could zip through it in only a few minutes and not much was of interest to me. Those ridiculous 6-, 7- or 8-page "fashion" layouts are what I remember hating the worst. Full page photos of silly poses and even sillier clothes.

    Posted by: me | Oct 9, 2006 8:00:54 PM


  7. Agree, Daniel…they are shallow…

    Not to mention that Out is apparently writing about victims of hate crimes (I can thing of the poor guys st maartin, for one) as if mag were penning a fictional after-school special, not reporting an appalling attack on our community as a whole.

    Either our goal is to be out or it’s not. It’s truly that simple. It’s time Out Magazine to figure out where they stand— save the new fonts for another day.

    Posted by: David Paglia, MD | Oct 9, 2006 9:25:04 PM


  8. it's probably ridiculous to try to hold "Out" to any standard - it's a lousy glossy magazine - and like all glossies its raison d'etre is to sell you shit.

    Posted by: mp | Oct 9, 2006 10:40:09 PM


  9. As far as I know, this is Out's 4TH different cover layout. I liked the first and third ones, but the second and this one SUCK.

    And once again, Out is selling OUT by plopping a straight man on the cover, and of course one who probably doesn't give a shit about LGBTs and is only doing this to further his career. If gay is the new straight in mainstream circles, then straight must be the new gay in LGBT circles.

    Posted by: Alex Sarmiento | Oct 10, 2006 2:25:10 AM


  10. The first secong i saw this cover i thought...

    "OMG you mean Kiera Knightly was a beard?"

    but then i realised that it's the simple recycled rubbish of having a decent looking straight guy on the cover in a poor attempt to further his "up and coming" career by appealing to the gay audience.

    I wonder if they asked him:

    "where abouts on the Kinsey scale do you sit?"

    It's begining to get a bit appalling

    Posted by: steve | Oct 10, 2006 3:48:40 AM


  11. Uhh, does anybody think this guy looks like one of the newer SNL cast members of this season? I mean I think he looks better but still, it's uncanny from this photo how similar they do look.

    Posted by: Scott A | Oct 10, 2006 6:12:16 AM


  12. Yet another straight boy for the gays to worship. Comment avant-garde.

    Posted by: just sayin' | Oct 10, 2006 9:02:17 AM


  13. The new cover looks great. And frankly, I don't understand why you're all kvetching about a straight boy on Out's cover- since when did that matter?!
    What the new editor should deliver is a cover figure with a compelling story!
    Jamie's hot, but why should we care about him?!

    Posted by: Astro | Oct 10, 2006 9:34:58 AM


  14. They coudln't find one gay person for the first cover of the revamped magazine? Chad Allen, maybe? John Cameron Mitchell? I guess having Jake Shears on the cover last month fulfilled their gay quotient for the year.

    Posted by: sam | Oct 10, 2006 9:35:21 AM


  15. Who cares about the cover? But I agree that the content is what needs an overhaul. Out is like, 2nd grader reading level. Don't gays deserve better? It's not just Out either. Genre, Instinct, etc--they're all about quick and easy access content under the assumption, I suppose, that gays either have low attention spans or regard their entertainment/leisure on a "right here, right now" format. Scantily clad cover models are one thing (hey, FHM and Maxim are guilty as charged as well), but I can look at pics of hot guys online for free. I don't need to buy a mag for that. It's all about the content for me.

    That being said, I'm glad Out is at least trying to make changes.

    Posted by: Derrick | Oct 10, 2006 10:27:11 AM


  16. From the grapevine, John Cameron Mitchell is on the next cover, and guys -- this was the magazine that just ran 4,000 words on homophobia in Poland in the October issue... superficial?

    Posted by: Toby | Oct 10, 2006 10:29:08 AM


  17. I wonder what percentage of OUT's readership knows where Poland is.

    Posted by: jmg | Oct 10, 2006 10:40:25 AM


  18. How are they going to get every cover model to tilt their heads the same way (due to the mags title) and look different for every issue?

    Posted by: Steven. | Oct 10, 2006 10:44:19 AM


  19. I think this cover looks terrific. Great photo, love the type.

    But I do see what you mean about straight guys on the cover of gay magazines. It's odd. Especially since most of them are really obscure. It's not there's a legion of Jamie Dornan fans out there.

    It would be like Essence magazine putting Jennifer Aniston on the cover just so they could sell more magazines. That never happens, and for good reason. You have to respect your audience. Essence is a magazine for black females; black females don't need white female cover subjects (even if those white females are hawking a product to black females). And the editors and publishers of Essence seem to know that. Even at the cost of not selling as many magazines by not having Jennifer Aniston on the cover.

    Out is a magazine for gay men, isn't it?

    Posted by: Shaun | Oct 10, 2006 10:48:58 AM


  20. Er, are gay guys only supposed to dig gay guys? Didn't realize that. Maybe the problem is that the pool of A-list homos is limited. There's a lot of A list black males and females, but there's only so many times you can put Jake Shears or Ellen on a cover... and I guess Anderson Cooper turned them down.

    Posted by: Franca | Oct 10, 2006 10:55:20 AM


  21. Thiscover layout reminds me of GENRE somehow, or other gay mags. It hink it looks cheap and unprofessional. Vanity Fair, GQ, the masthead looks the same for a reason, it's iconic. I thought that OUT finally had a solid, iconic masthead and then they ruin it with this awkward crap. Such a shame. But OUT (and all the other US gay rags) have been irrelevant for so long it hardly seems to matter anymore.

    Posted by: Ryan | Oct 10, 2006 11:37:46 AM


  22. I am totally feeling his outfit: the fitted jacket with high arm holes, the simple white dress shirt un-buttoned, the black tie strategically draped over his neck, the low-keyed belt and, last but certainly not least, the white pocket square.

    Understated elegance never goes out of style.

    Posted by: not a fashion whore | Oct 10, 2006 12:41:08 PM


  23. Love the layout, photo and font. Also loved the content of the last issue and the 70's inspired fashion layout. I have noticed a difference since Hicklin has come on board and I like what I have seen and read so far. More please.

    Posted by: PS | Oct 10, 2006 3:25:23 PM


  24. I hate Out Magazine. It represents all the vacous and superficial values of the gay community, add to that the fact that it only seems to cater to white, affluent gays with enough disposable income to buy whatever is in their ridiculously long and useless 18 page fashion spreads.

    Every month it's a different straight model on the cover or some Z-list straight actor, who cares! Every article includes a straight person saying something to the effect, "I have no problems with the gays. I love gays. Yay gays!" Pandering like it's nobody's business!

    Just kill it already.

    Posted by: R. Pelligrini | Oct 10, 2006 4:07:02 PM


  25. Hola faretaste
    mekodinosad

    Posted by: AnferTuto | Jul 28, 2007 12:51:16 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «An Update: Recent Hate Crimes, Robberies in Britain« «