The Fashion Industry and The 2016 Election

Vogue’s decision to endorse Clinton could be because they want to sell more magazines, but also because someone with considerable power over Vogue and the fashion industry is trying to make a statement to advance their career or social status.

In an editorial, Vogue claims: “Vogue has no history of political endorsements… given the profound stakes of this [election], and the history that stands to be made, we feel that should change.” So, what benefit would Anna Wintour receive from an endorsement of Hillary?

Fashion now has the ability to affect both political leaders and opinions in the US presidential election.  Fashion is understood by masses, and that is something powerful that has no ties with society as a whole. Fashion means social trends, which serves society and unites economics with culture.

The fashion industry has – and will –  always stir social controversy. Any industry influences politics if it affects manufacturing, but the difference between most industries and the fashion industry is that fashion is capable of bending the rules.

This election in particular has had a full range of surprises. This makes it clairvoyant that fashion does indeed impact politics from a social standpoint, and that figures like Anna Wintour do have ties to politics. Anna Wintour seemingly jumped on the independent woman bandwagon and made a political statement based on being in the right place at the right time.

Fashion magazines give politicians who do interviews or editorials an opportunity to reach out to audiences who don’t fall under the typical political niche. Vogue has nearly 1.2 million subscribers who tend to be educated females. It may be rather risky for a fashion magazine to isolate their conservative readers; however, when you buy a magazine, you are buying into a lifestyle.

The Fashion Industry and The 2016 Election