It seems like they only mention one magazine, Oprah, that has shown a big increase in sales when Michelle Obama is on the cover. I would love to know how many subscriptions were canceled or magazines not renewed because she is on the cover. You may want to say that the economy is impacting the number sold, but Oprah’s magazine is one the last to hit the newsstands. I know that there are a lot of other magazines that had her on the cover and I wonder how their sales did. From this article I think that magazines are realizing that Obamas are not the selling tool to use in the future. They were too busy shoving them to us on covers prior to January to look at numbers. Interesting idea, much of this article compares covers to average 2008 numbers, which many times had the Obamas on covers. I wonder how their Obamas covers did compared to other covers on a month by month basis.
But the comment made about the cover of the Vogue magazine cracks me up just because I would not even read the magazine at the salon much less spend a thin dime on anything that has Michelle Obama on the cover.
Vogue and The New Yorker, which ran a Michelle Obama-themed cover on its March 16 issue, said it is still too early to say how those issues fared at newsstands.
(It was also this cover that prompted me to start the First Ladies posts, next up is Hannah Van Buren.)