Paulina Gretzky on cover of Golf Digest

I really really do not like this move. It frustrates me to say the least.
 
So I went and looked at the online version. I see that she's demonstrating some exercises. Would I believe in the exercises more if they showed an LPGA player doing them? No. Would I think I'd be a better golfer because an LPGA player was pictured doing them? No. Do I think I can have a Gretzy like body if I do them? No. It doesn't really matter who is shown doing the exercises to me, I just want to learn what to do, how to do it and why I should do it. And this is the area where I think the magazine missed the mark. The online version has no meaningful text addressing these points, so the reader is left to infer. The associated text is sort of "human interest-y" type stuff, which I don't care about - regardless of who is pictured. And to make it worse, there's a quote where she says fitness is 70% diet and 30% exercise...so why am I reading this exercise segment again?
 
So I went and looked at the online version. I see that she's demonstrating some exercises. Would I believe in the exercises more if they showed an LPGA player doing them? No. Would I think I'd be a better golfer because an LPGA player was pictured doing them? No. Do I think I can have a Gretzy like body if I do them? No. It doesn't really matter who is shown doing the exercises to me, I just want to learn what to do, how to do it and why I should do it. And this is the area where I think the magazine missed the mark. The online version has no meaningful text addressing these points, so the reader is left to infer. The associated text is sort of "human interest-y" type stuff, which I don't care about - regardless of who is pictured. And to make it worse, there's a quote where she says fitness is 70% diet and 30% exercise...so why am I reading this exercise segment again?

FWIW, the print edition tells you how to do the exercises she is demonstrating and why they are good for golf. The text in the online photo gallery comes from the interview.
 
So I went and looked at the online version. I see that she's demonstrating some exercises. Would I believe in the exercises more if they showed an LPGA player doing them? No. Would I think I'd be a better golfer because an LPGA player was pictured doing them? No. Do I think I can have a Gretzy like body if I do them? No. It doesn't really matter who is shown doing the exercises to me, I just want to learn what to do, how to do it and why I should do it. And this is the area where I think the magazine missed the mark. The online version has no meaningful text addressing these points, so the reader is left to infer. The associated text is sort of "human interest-y" type stuff, which I don't care about - regardless of who is pictured. And to make it worse, there's a quote where she says fitness is 70% diet and 30% exercise...so why am I reading this exercise segment again?


She's right.
 
I could care less. They're trying to sell issues and I'm sure they compared numbers from the issue with Holly on the cover. I doubt this was random.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
 
http://www.golfchannel.com/media/le...ster-critical-golf-digest-cover-choice_040414

debate on Morning drive..Matt Ginella(former Golf Digest employee) vs. Paige Mackenzie(LPGA) not really heated but you can tell in the end that Paige was really pi$$ed about it

Damn. Paulina is not in the golf industry or the fitness industry Paige nailed it. Holly last year makes sense but this doesn't. Paige made some good points like you could have a male golfer or someone from the fitness world and acknowledging that sex sells and they could have used an LPGA player. Don't get me wrong Paulina looks good but has zero credibility in the golf and fitness world.

Most shocking to me is the fact Golf Digest hasn't had an LPGA player on the cover since 2008. Hey Rex if the goal is to grow the game that fact is embarrassing.
 
Damn. Paulina is not in the golf industry or the fitness industry Paige nailed it. Holly last year makes sense but this doesn't. Paige made some good points like you could have a male golfer or someone from the fitness world and acknowledging that sex sells and they could have used an LPGA player. Don't get me wrong Paulina looks good but has zero credibility in the golf and fitness world.

Most shocking to me is the fact Golf Digest hasn't had an LPGA player on the cover since 2008. Hey Rex if the goal is to grow the game that fact is embarrassing.

I agree and as someone who follows golf majorly, I agree with the Holly statement. At the same time, I don't think it has anything to do with golf for them this time. It's strictly a "sex sells" statement and looking to cash in on the people who don't know any better if she's apart of the industry or not.
 
I agree and as someone who follows golf majorly, I agree with the Holly statement. At the same time, I don't think it has anything to do with golf for them this time. It's strictly a "sex sells" statement and looking to cash in on the people who don't know any better if she's apart of the industry or not.

I know and I hate it. They could have gone with Julian Michales, attractive and well known for fitness.
 
Damn. Paulina is not in the golf industry or the fitness industry Paige nailed it. Holly last year makes sense but this doesn't. Paige made some good points like you could have a male golfer or someone from the fitness world and acknowledging that sex sells and they could have used an LPGA player. Don't get me wrong Paulina looks good but has zero credibility in the golf and fitness world.

Most shocking to me is the fact Golf Digest hasn't had an LPGA player on the cover since 2008. Hey Rex if the goal is to grow the game that fact is embarrassing.

Absolutely embarrassing. The cover did it's job of getting people talking about it and getting more people to buy it, but dang it's just not right from someone in the golf world. Could have been on there with DJ and it would kinda make sense, but that didn't happen.
 
Paulina Gretzky on cover of Golf Digest

I wouldn't buy a magazine for it's cover, but sure Paulina is hot, but the missing credibility is bothering me, there's so many fit pro players that could have fit the "profile" of this cover. I like beautiful women, and there's nothing wrong in being pretty, but most of the modern age celebrities shouldn't be on magazine covers, Instagram and tabloids are where they belong.

GD in general, it's fine, a lot of areas that would be interesting, they seem to be quite shallow, and some areas they go deep and deliver good stuff.
 
Most shocking to me is the fact Golf Digest hasn't had an LPGA player on the cover since 2008. Hey Rex if the goal is to grow the game that fact is embarrassing.
Is it really that shocking? What has happened on the LPGA tour that is tremendously noteworthy and when did it happen? Presumably it isn't going to beat out a comparable PGA story and some months are taken up with pre-defiend topics (e.g., Hot List, or whatever it is called), so there probably are smaller windows of opportunity than it seems. Inbee Park had that incredible run and they obviously could have worked in a more human interest type piece that wasn't tied to a particular event, though one could have an honest belief that she isn't going to move the needle in the US market. But for the sake of argument I will agree that was a potential miss. Other than that, anything?
 
Meh. They had Kate Upton on the cover last year. Periodically, I hear pretty girls are used to sell things.

Once you expand nearly any sport from the specifics of it to generalized fitness, there's the opportunity to bring in people who aren't dedicated sports personalities, but "fit" looking people in general, who might also fit more conventional ideas of attractiveness. My wife reads Runner's World, and they use fitness issues to put people like Camille LeBlanc on the cover instead of the stick figures that actually dominate distance running.

Is it silly & petty? Sure. Should Golf Digest have female golfers on the cover? Absolutely (and it's a disgrace that they don't.) Could they have found a female golfer who fits the bill to be on the cover? Of course. My vote goes to Sandra Gal. Does this give the golf industry a chance to tie success (like Dustin Johnson's) to snagging the head cheerleader and making millions of dollars, as a golfer? You betcha. It's nothing new in the world of advertising.
 
I dont mind at all...

I have never been mad looking at any picture involving Paulina Gretzky.
 
Is it really that shocking? What has happened on the LPGA tour that is tremendously noteworthy and when did it happen? Presumably it isn't going to beat out a comparable PGA story and some months are taken up with pre-defiend topics (e.g., Hot List, or whatever it is called), so there probably are smaller windows of opportunity than it seems. Inbee Park had that incredible run and they obviously could have worked in a more human interest type piece that wasn't tied to a particular event, though one could have an honest belief that she isn't going to move the needle in the US market. But for the sake of argument I will agree that was a potential miss. Other than that, anything?

Lydia Ko for starters.
 
I really really do not like this move. It frustrates me to say the least.
What's the big deal lol ... "to say the least"? That's almost a bit extreme .. so to, "say the most"? What's that gotta be like? :)

Listen, I've been behind the lens for over 37 years! I've had the opportunity to work with J Walter Thompson,
and TOP NOTCH ad agencies for over 30 of those years.
If Fawcett McDermott (or whoever GD's ad agency is) had their art director call me to set up a meeting with one of they're account execs and GD,
along with Paulina for cover? You can bet your schaweet green camouflage that I'd be there with batteries charged and bright eyed and bushy tailed ..

This is a "business" that is re-inventing itself in a time where social media is as dominant as ever. I applaud GD for it's creativity.
Not only that, but it's generated what will turn into atleast 10 pages of controversy on this internet forum .. just ONE internet forum.
I'd say their job is done .. and I'd bet that they sell more of this issue than the one before ..

Would I buy it "just because"? No, I already have a work-out routine, and I'm not really into Paulina.
Unless some ad agency wanted me to shoot her for some magazine cover .. :twist:
 
Is it really that shocking? What has happened on the LPGA tour that is tremendously noteworthy and when did it happen? Presumably it isn't going to beat out a comparable PGA story and some months are taken up with pre-defiend topics (e.g., Hot List, or whatever it is called), so there probably are smaller windows of opportunity than it seems. Inbee Park had that incredible run and they obviously could have worked in a more human interest type piece that wasn't tied to a particular event, though one could have an honest belief that she isn't going to move the needle in the US market. But for the sake of argument I will agree that was a potential miss. Other than that, anything?

You bet if Inbee looked like Paulina or Holly she'd be all over haha
 
I'm a huge fan of it. Reasons are obvious. But then, I don't subscribe to golf digest, so it makes no difference to me who is on the cover.

~Rock
 
Wasn't Kate Upton on the cover of a golf magazine awhile back? Not sure how this is different.
 
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]

The LPGA already has problems getting ratings, most of their tournaments are overseas, they really aren't in a position to refuse any publicity, GD hasn't had an LPGA player on the cover in the US cause the LPGA doesn't move the needle here! I'm sure LPGA players have been on the cover in foreign versions of GD where the LPGA is more visible.

Besides this cover not only helps Golf Digest with their sales but this controversy has helped get people in the US talking about the LPGA as well.
 
Wasn't Kate Upton on the cover of a golf magazine awhile back? Not sure how this is different.

She was standing next to Arnold Palmer.
 
Damn. Paulina is not in the golf industry or the fitness industry Paige nailed it. Holly last year makes sense but this doesn't. Paige made some good points like you could have a male golfer or someone from the fitness world and acknowledging that sex sells and they could have used an LPGA player. Don't get me wrong Paulina looks good but has zero credibility in the golf and fitness world.

Most shocking to me is the fact Golf Digest hasn't had an LPGA player on the cover since 2008. Hey Rex if the goal is to grow the game that fact is embarrassing.

Is this really shocking? How often does Sports Illustrated have WNBA players on the cover? The fact is, these magazines are businesses and their goal is to make money. The LPGA is not exactly popular with the general public, and realistically I have no idea how many of us on THP really are follow that tour.
 
The fact that there are 9 pages of discussion here = Golf Digest wins.
 
Are there any published photos of Paulina Gretzky completely clothed?
 
Is it really that shocking? What has happened on the LPGA tour that is tremendously noteworthy and when did it happen? Presumably it isn't going to beat out a comparable PGA story and some months are taken up with pre-defiend topics (e.g., Hot List, or whatever it is called), so there probably are smaller windows of opportunity than it seems. Inbee Park had that incredible run and they obviously could have worked in a more human interest type piece that wasn't tied to a particular event, though one could have an honest belief that she isn't going to move the needle in the US market. But for the sake of argument I will agree that was a potential miss. Other than that, anything?

I think that is selling the entire tour a bit short. They were worthy enough to cover clearly as they have had stories and numerous on the players, tour, etc.

The fact that there are 9 pages of discussion here = Golf Digest wins.

I dont see it that way. Nobody here is buying an extra issue, or deciding to buy an issue due to this conversation. In fact a few said they would not be renewing (not because of this), which I am not sure I understand either.
 
Back
Top