We Hear You! Letters from Our March 2013 Issue

Leave a comment here or send us your feedback by letter or e-mail—we love hearing your thoughts!

by MORE • Editors

I've been a subscriber to most of the magazines you've edited.  I love reading magazines and have done so for as long as I can remember.  More has always catered to women over 40. Please don't change that very special side to the magazine.  This is what sets it apart from the countless other publications geared to women in their 30s.  Go back to your original plan and celebrate women in the second half of their life.  So much more interesting.
--Anonymous

Where, oh where has my MORE magazine gone?

As a charter subscriber, I looked forward to many years of relevant articles/photos to support my journey into senior womanhood. But wait! MORE seems to have abandoned its 45-64 year-old targeted demographic, electing instead to go the way of other youth obsessed magazines. Why?

Why must you also photoshop images of every woman who appears in your magazine? (Especially ironic in the "This is what --- looks like" feature.)  Is the sight of a mature woman really so repulsive?

Having walked through a number of magazine headquarters in NYC, I can only conjecture that the problem with your magazine is the same as many others... the majority of your staff is just too young to "get it."  Perhaps your seasoned professionals can steer MORE back to it's original mission: addressing the issues facing women past the childbearing years.

Blaze some trails!  Don't be afraid. You were headed in the right direction but somehow chickened out.  We're out here, ready and waiting to read.
--Amy Virginia Evans

Really? You really think women on their 60's should wear this stuff? Black and white clown pants and black and white full skirts and black and white horizontal striped tent coats? Women in their 60's are not stupid. According to this article, we should throw out all our color and prepare for death. You will not understand how ridiculous these choices are until you are my age.
--Laura Jones

I have read all the letters for the March issue.  I am summarizing those that were repeated multiple times that I agree with completely.  After marketing your magazine towards 40+, why are your creating a 2 page fashion spread for women in their 30's? Trust me, they are not reading More Magazine. Please continue with the concept, but replace 30's with 70's. After all, women in their 70's are thriving these days.  It's not what it used to be!  Also, PLEASE stop doing photo spreads of celebrities looking like they are trying to be seductive.  Connie Britton's pictures and the fashion was better suited to MAXIM Magazine.  Katie Couric's pictures with her "come hither" sexy looks were just ridiculous! These are healthy, attractive women and we can't relate to them with your current approach. 

Finally, please stop adding long articles that seem to reveal your political point of view.  The article about the immigration attorney was a puff piece that was insulting to all of us who are struggling with the current economy and the possible amnesty that is heading our way.  It's obvious that you are not aware that there are thousands of citizens who are unemployed and have all but given up looking for work. The suggestions in this article were insulting for those of us who are suffering in our states with the ever increasing burden that comes with immigration. Please continue with articles that are of interest to women and we will continue to subscribe.
--Anonymous

Dear Meredith,

After buying MORE from the very first edition, I am becoming a little disillusioned with some editorial (or perhaps marketing?) decisions.  Recently I have noticed the 30s decade being included and I don't understand why this would be part of MORE's target demographic.  There are already many magazines aimed at women in their 20s and 30s and these younger women do not face the same skincare, fashion and life challenges that older women do.

Share Your Thoughts!

Comments

Lynn Cadogan04.17.2013

I have never written a magazine before but you are always asking for comments and feed back, so I felt compelled to write. I enjoy reading MORE and share it with friends when I finish. The articles are appropriate and very informative but in looking at the ads I find a big discrepancy in the age of women you are "writing" for and the appearance of the models. Except for maybe Diane Keaton, I couldn't find a model that looked "mature" and had any wrinkles. I would like to see more advertising with vibrant, more mature realistic looking women since that is the demographic your magazine is written for. Thanks for letting me share my comment.

04.05.2013

I read More cover-to-cover every month and have never written in before, but the article on the pills we can't kick was a major eye-opener. I was prescribed Effexor 3 years ago when I was diagnosed with breast cancer. It was supposed to stop the hot flashes brought on by suddenly stopping HRT. After reading your article, I began to research Effexor and found that it causes hot flashes(!) and many other pretty nasty side effects. I started to taper off a few weeks ago and stopped taking it completely 6 days ago. The withdrawals are awful--really, truly awful--but I know eventually they will stop and I will no longer be putting my health in jeopardy taking a drug that isn't even meant to do what it was prescribed to do. If I still have hot flashes, I will suffer them naturally. I already take Black Cohash and will add other supplements or vitamins to help. Thank you so much for such an important article.

Carol 03.21.2013

No no no.....no 30 somethings in More! You promised a magazine for women over 40 - please honor that! And while you are at it, it wouldn't hurt to add "This is what 70 looks like". I read More front to back and back to front. I used to shop your ads for products I knew would be for me at my age.....but this is uncomfortably becoming more of my daughters' magazine. We deserve the More original market - I am waiting to spend....

03.07.2013

I love More, and I love Connie Britton. And believe me, I am no prude. But I did not love the girlie-mag photos that accompanied an otherwise very good story on this very interesting, strong and intelligent woman. Did I pick up the wrong magazine? Have I turned into my Great-Aunt Lila Lee, who would have been shocked and appalled by the overtly sexy display of Ms. Britton's bits, barely covered with scanty scraps? I believe in celebrating our fabulousness. But I have to wonder -- to what audience were you playing with those photos? Has More decided to be Maxim?

Julie 03.04.2013

I have become very disillusioned with MORE. It seems you are trying to reach a younger demographic (already more than well served) by including the 30s, whilst paying less attention to women in their 60s and 70s. I am 51 and have nothing in common with women in their 30s with regards to skin care, lifestyle, etc. Reading other womens' comments, I see I am not alone in this point of view. I would love to hear from the Editor on why the 30 somethings are now included.

Kate Dockham03.03.2013

I enjoy your magazine, but often think it is geared to women of a different lifestyle than my on-the-go mom and teacher life. I was looking through the Stylebook: Dressing for the Decades, and found a pair of shoes I had to have whether in the teacher budget or not. So I went to the Vince Camuto site to find the studded black sandals shown and nothing! How disappointing that I finally take the plunge and follow a piece of information from your magazine only to be unable to even find a picture of the same sandals. It is only March 3rd, hard to believe the season/trend/moment has eclipsed me already. Just another lesson for this everyday teacher to learn.
Sadly Shoeless,
Kate Dockham

Post new comment

Click to add a comment