Yellow Journalism In Vogue?

All right, Vogue. As much as we appreciate your heritage and all, there was something in your May issue that we just cannot let go.
Page 220, a woman shops at Whole Foods:
While my eight-month-old wriggles around in the grocery card, I’m scanning the labels, attempting to translate each ID into a concept I can understand: safe to eat or not safe to eat.
At first we thought maybe this was one of those oddball self-help stories you like to run on occasion, like “How I Beat My Paranoid Personality Disorder” or something. Or perhaps this woman is going to share her experience with raising a child with severe food allergies.
Nope. Next sentence:
Like other supermarkets, Whole Foods doesn’t provide mercury concentrations in the fish they sell.
Really?
Everyone knows there’s mercury in fish, but isn’t this a little sensationalist? We admit we’re not experts on mercury, but then again, neither is Vogue. Have people been dying from mercury in fish and we missed it? (No. We checked. Even Jeremy Piven is still at it on “Entourage.”)
Reading on, this still reeks of an “overcoming my paranoia” story. Sadly, it isn’t.
At dinner later, as Carys, my three-year-old, happily munches on the fish, I start to feel panicky. This trout is so big, so fleshy… Now, on her dainty plate, it’s impossible to ignore. I tell her to wait while I run upstairs. I Google ‘mercury, lake trout, great lakes’ to panic-inducing results…
This goes on for two and a half more pages. Author Bronwyn Garrity tells us about the “paralyzing” dilemma she faces because so many studies say we should eat more fish because of long-chain fatty acids, etc.
And yet, “the ravages of mercury” abound.
Really?!
Garrity offers a detailed account about getting her blood mercury level tested at the doctor — and her “discovery” that “when I go out with friends, it’s easy to find people with blood mercury levels well above the EPA’s limit of 5.8.” Umm…
Lo and behold, Garrity reveals at the end of the piece that her blood mercury levels turned out to be perfectly safe. And her children are happy and healthy. Which leads us to the point of all this: What was the point of all this? To scare us away from the sushi bar?
Memo to Anna Wintour: There’s a certain standard of journalism that your loyal readers have come to expect. Why would you run such a scaremongering and pointless article?
And how — how — did this accompanying full-page photo of a puppy eating toys make it into your magazine?

![[flourish]](http://ethicalstyle.com/wp-content/themes/es/images/topFlourish.png)

![[flourish]](http://ethicalstyle.com/wp-content/themes/es/images/botFlourish.png)

Someone at Vogue should have asked themselves “dose the article (concept) have legs”. Clearly it did not and so they decided to add the dog photo.
Comment by Leonard — May 15, 2009 @ 3:24 pm