Magazine covers are one of the most prominent forms of imagery within print media. In a world where the ‘#VogueChallenge’ has become a viral social media trend, it’s obvious that the front pages of magazines is something that is of crucial importance to both a publisher and their audience.
Taking a shift from fashion then comes National Geographic. Where fashion magazines feature their models and cooking magazines, their cakes, National Geographic features two things: culture and geography. Begun in 1959, these covers offer a brief and fantastic insight into the subject matter of the magazine – usually reflecting a key article or theme of the issue.
Every so often (and more recently than ever), National Geographic merges these themes together to discuss geopolitics. This is made evident on the June 2018 cover ‘Planet or Plastic’ of which highlights an article discussing the impact of plastic on the world’s oceans. Similarly, the January 2021 edition of the magazine features a photograph of the vandalised Robert E Lee statue, making reference to the extreme impact of the #BLM movement seen mid-2020.
It’s obvious these covers hold some intrinsic meaning, aside from simply being a pretty feature image. This is made even more obvious when the outlet dips into the aforementioned geopolitical articles.
Take ‘Planet or Plastic’ for example – its cover, much like any other image, can be read and interpreted in a number of different ways, depending on a reader’s differing ideologies or contexts. This investigation into meaning is known as semiotics and is the foundation of how these covers can make force a consumer to think.
The focal point (or signifier) of the image lies on the plastic bag floating in the ocean. This can be interpreted in a number of different ways, however, it can be mostly understood (signified) that this article is primarily about the environmental impact of plastic on our oceans.
For example, a more educated reader may see this image and begin to consider the role of plastic in the climate change crisis. Contrastingly, someone less-educated on the topic may begin to question if plastic is a problem at all. Regardless, both individuals are invited to analyse, react and attach their own connotations to the image – whether or not they’re even aware of it.
Stuart Hall’s ‘Reception Theory’ also plays a role in an individual’s engagement with National Geographic’s covers, especially in regards to the more political of its covers. This theory suggests that there are a variety of different viewpoints through which one can understand an image or text. A young environmentalist may interpret this image in a dominant way, meaning they agree with the images’ pro-sustainability message.
Alternatively, a climate change denier may disagree with the image, taking the oppositional viewpoint. Regardless of which is correct, these individuals are both actively engaging with the magazines’ cover.
So what’s my point then? Well, these covers are making you, the consumer, think. Be it for or against, considering any of these things is a driving force to sell magazines.
It’s why Time magazine featured Donald Trump on their 2016 issue, or why Vanity Fair comprised a cover simply of the Italian flag. Magazine companies employ a tactical use of imagery to make you think… because the more you think, the more you’ll buy.
