We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Paulina Gretzky on cover of Golf Digest

Jank said:
I disagree with that completely. LPGA simply does not move product, so putting an LPGA player on the cover would do nothing for Golf Digest. Clearly, putting an attractive person with some small tie to the game of golf does wonders for them.
Click to expand...
You may disagree, but this IS a news story primarily because there hasn't been an LPGA player on the cover since 2008.
 
bbuonic81 said:
I also think comparing Golf Digest to Pro Football Weekly is a bit of a stretch - I think we can all agree Golf Digest isn't something based totally around reporting PGA Tour/Professional Golf news. How about the Anna Benson cover of the Sporting News? Is that really all that different?

http://bit.ly/1gtLEg3
Click to expand...

yes, because she was in the news, but also a bullsh!t move by SN.

Golf Digest is a publication that is all encompassing the world of golf.
The cover has absolutely NOTHING to do with golf.
Just as Paris Hilton has nothing to do with football other than being the latest hag that one of them brought into a bathroom stall.
 
I'm offended, but only because she is a butter face.
 
Did it generate some buzz? Absolutely. Will it sell more magazines? Possibly -- although the pics are all over the web, so while I haven't received my copy of the magazine yet (subscription) I have already seen what the buzz is about.

That said, I think this is a poor move by GD and one that could have some backlash, specifically from the LPGA (compliants have already started) and from possible female readers / subscribers. I like checking out hot chicks just as much as the next guy, but I'm not sure that putting them in my golf magazine is where they belong. Maxim, sure...but not here. To carry this one further--and this was pointed out by my wife--why is it that every time they show something about female golfers they have to be half naked? Big Break is full of voyueristic shots (slow pan-ups from the knee, tight fitting tops that expose nipples, short skirts/shorts that leave ass cheeks hanging out, etc.) that an outsider would have no clue that the show is about prospective players trying to get invited to play professionally. Again, I'm not complaining, but I do see her point...and for a section of the sport that is SERIOUSLY struggling to attract new players, publications and TV shows have to be mindful of this.
 
War Eagle said:
When was the last time there was so much buzz about a magazine cover for Golf Digest?

Yep, that's why they did it.

It's all about generating buzz about your product, if it sells more magazines then it worked.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. As a short term business decision, think it was a great move because they are getting a ton of buzz (good and bad) and probably a lot of sales/website traffic. Long term, does this really tarnish GDs reputation? Personally I flip through GD when I am at the airport when I have a few minutes to kill so no matter to me.

I get my golf news at the only reputable operation out there anymore, THP!
 
deuce said:
Golf Digest may see short term gains, but it may do long term harm to their brand. Could the LPGA be in the drivers seat on this issue, refusing to grant GD any access/interviews for the forseeable future? I think they should do so ...

Additionally, the mere fact that the first LPGA player they put on the cover will be the first LPGA on the cover since 2008 (IIRC) would make a splash in and of itself, so attractiveness wouldn't even be a factor.
Same here.[/COLOR]
Click to expand...

Michelle Wie was just on the cover a few months back...
 
I let my subscription to Golf Digest run out once they dropped the monthly column "The Hungover Caddie"... that was the beginning of the end in my eyes...hahaha
 
darnall said:
I let my subscription to Golf Digest run out once they dropped the monthly column "The Hungover Caddie"... that was the beginning of the end in my eyes...hahaha
Click to expand...

I will probably let mine expire. The kicker was when they got rid of the swing sequence section. I don't need to know Jordan Spieth's swing triggers when he's barefoot on a beach.
 
blugold said:
I will probably let mine expire. The kicker was when they got rid of the swing sequence section. I don't need to know Jordan Spieth's swing triggers when he's barefoot on a beach.
Click to expand...

It might help if you get picked for Vibram shoe testing!
 
blugold said:
Michelle Wie was just on the cover a few months back...
Click to expand...
Here is where I gleaned my information. No mention of Michelle Wie at all.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/04/sports/golf/female-golfers-rankled-by-magazines-cover.html?_r=0

The last L.P.G.A. Tour winner to appear on the magazine’s cover is Lorena Ochoa, in August 2008. Inkster, 53, was featured in October 1992.

Besides Gretzky, the only woman to be given sole billing on the cover without having won a pro or major amateur event is the Golf Channel personality Holly Sonders, in May 2013. (Nicklaus’s wife, Barbara, appeared on the March 1975 cover with her husband’s instructor, Jack Grout.) The model Kate Upton posed alongside Arnold Palmer in December’s issue.
​

What issue was it blugold? No mention of Michelle Wie in the Golf Digest archive found here.
 
JB said:
yes, because she was in the news, but also a bullsh!t move by SN.

Golf Digest is a publication that is all encompassing the world of golf.
The cover has absolutely NOTHING to do with golf.
Just as Paris Hilton has nothing to do with football other than being the latest hag that one of them brought into a bathroom stall.
Click to expand...

Now, I don't really care all that much, but I can't believe you'd argue that Anna Benson was "in the news" and Paulina Gretzky isn't. Both are essentially the same character - known for being pretty, being a professional athlete's WAG, and causing controversy with their sexuality.

The Gold Digest cover and the Sporting News cover have exactly the same amount to do with sport - one has a golf club on it, one has baseballs on it. Neither being used in the "way they are intended to be used."

I also don't know if joking/being sarcastic about the bathroom stall comment, but if you're not there's an awful lot of anger there over a magazine cover.

Could they have put together a more relevant cover, without a doubt. Am I more or less likely to pick up this issue (or any future issue) of Golf Digest, not at all.

Golf Digest is just trying to do the same thing they do with the Hot List or any other of their talked about issues - sell something.
 
I just looked at all the 2013 issues, she wasn't on the cover. Just looked at the current 2014 issues, I see no Michelle. I see Adam Scott January, Phil for February, A Golf Tee for March, and Rory for April.
 
Mward said:
I just looked at all the 2013 issues, she wasn't on the cover. Just looked at the current 2014 issues, I see no Michelle. I see Adam Scott January, Phil for February, A Golf Tee for March, and Rory for April.
Click to expand...

A sexy golf tee?
 
Honestly I rather see an amateur on the cover than a professional because I can relate to amateurs. None of us are professionals. PG does play golf so I see nothing wrong with it. GD said in the statement that she is one of the top golf celebrities, which she is.
 
JB said:
Its an interesting move.
So many LPGA girls work hard on fitness and this would have been a good spot.
So many fitness people work inside the golf industry and would have been good for this.
So many PGA Tour professionals take fitness seriously and would have been good for this.

Instead they chose a "celebrity" and I view it no differently than putting Paris Hilton on the front of NFL.com when she was dating a player. Something that the NFL would never do. Its a weak splash for attention and while I have some great friends that work there, something like this I find "interesting" to say the least.
Click to expand...
I think it's a huge move to sell magazines, but doesn't seem like it helps golf in the end.
 
blugold said:
WHAT!!! The New York Times got something wrong in their reporting!?!!?!?! hehe
Click to expand...
If the Times did, then Golf Digest did as well. So really the issue appears to be that the one with their facts wrong is you.
 
bbuonic81 said:
Now, I don't really care all that much, but I can't believe you'd argue that Anna Benson was "in the news" and Paulina Gretzky isn't. Both are essentially the same character - known for being pretty, being a professional athlete's WAG, and causing controversy with their sexuality.

The Gold Digest cover and the Sporting News cover have exactly the same amount to do with sport - one has a golf club on it, one has baseballs on it. Neither being used in the "way they are intended to be used."

I also don't know if joking/being sarcastic about the bathroom stall comment, but if you're not there's an awful lot of anger there over a magazine cover.

Could they have put together a more relevant cover, without a doubt. Am I more or less likely to pick up this issue (or any future issue) of Golf Digest, not at all.

Golf Digest is just trying to do the same thing they do with the Hot List or any other of their talked about issues - sell something.
Click to expand...

You skimmed over the part where I said the SN cover was a bullsh!t move too. Just as this one is.
 
deuce said:
No, you did. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of a good debate, right?
Click to expand...

I am going to find a picture of Michelle Wie on the cover of Golf Digest.


As I look at it, maybe it was just an article inside the magazine. But I thought she was on the cover as well...
 
blugold said:
I am going to find a picture of Michelle Wie on the cover of Golf Digest.


As I look at it, maybe it was just an article inside the magazine. But I thought she was on the cover as well...
Click to expand...
If Michelle Wie wins this weekend, and they throw her on the next cover, it doesn't count. :wink:
 
I think the cover is going to do exactly what they want... Sell magazines. I would say many more people will buy the magazine on a drive by than will actually ever cancel their subscription because of the cover.

The occasional golfer hat never would have given this magazine a look may now actually pick it up and page through it. These same folks may find there is actually good content in the magazine and decide to pick up a subscription.

Either way I never get why people get so up in arms about these things. Sometimes it's a cover sometimes it's an advertisement. If you don't like it then turn the page.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
deuce said:
If Michelle Wie wins this weekend, and they throw her on the next cover, it doesn't count. :wink:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm completely wrong. It wasn't a cover, just an article.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top