It is no secret that it is the beauty editor's section that drives the ad dollars for a publication. From the mass market Proctor and Gamble products to the designer Lancome creams, it is hope in a jar that makes this industry jump. Their infusion of high priced advertisements lure customers without the disposable income for the rest of goods peddled in our style bibles. Beauty products can be had by all. And yet, I wonder if this makes beauty editors the most vulnerable of all to persuasion.
The question then arises how do we know if a product is good? It would seem that in the beauty pages an editor would be even more susceptible to giving advertisers a little face time in the editorial pages. It is so easy, so harmless, and will make the folks on the other side of the fence so happy. When mentioning lip glosses just casually reference Cover Girl, even if the best cheap lip gloss is Bonne Bell. Go ahead, Cover Girl put in more face time and heck no one will notice the difference. It's just lipgloss! Heck, maybe both products even get mentioned since why doesn't need an extra lipgloss right?
We know that putting in the advertisers is something that happens at all the magazines. Many people will attest to the charts hanging inside the market editors offices with mentions of major advertisers in issues just to ensure even play.
At least working clothing into a shoot takes some effort. We see how a stylist can use a regular brand like Gap or Banana Republic in a high fashion shoot, not only pleasing the advertisers but allowing regular consumers to appreciate how to integrate many types of clothing into their wardrobe. I would say that by and large there is at least some added value to the advertiser play in styling shoots.
But with plunking in a few beauty products it seems like the barrier to pay for play is just too low. Working a beauty product that is less effective into our routine adds no value, in fact it takes away from routines dramatically. Unlike clothing sometimes a random choice can wreck very real havoc on our health.
Recently a new initiative by Johnson and Johnson for a stress busting beauty product found editors all over town with hand delivered silver plates containing options to help them melt their stress away. And no it wasn't bath oil. The options included a hotel getaway, a limo ride through town, a private chef for the evening, and other suitably persuasive offers that makes a beauty editor think twice about suggesting that fantastic new Johnson and Johnson product over any other.
While I know that this sort of thing happens all the time, nevertheless it makes me question every single product suggested in the beauty pages. The editors know we all rush out to buy their favorites. The Allure product plugs are some of the most sought after in the business. But how much do we really trust these products? Sure, some of the products are probably genuinely good and the editor in question not only knows her stuff but is passing it on to us consumers. But how to tell? If both Bonne Bell and Cover Girl are making it in every time which product is the real value? It seems in this situation we have a very pronounced case of the woman why cried lipgloss.
The allure and romance of youth is a classic theme of the pastoral story. We have been giving it a lot of thought on our other blogs. But one key element that most evokes the imagination is scent. All the imagery and sounds of romance can't even begin to touch the emotions that bubble to surface from one whiff. We imagine that is part of the success of Estee Lauder Youth Dew. It captures the beauty, mystery and power of youth in a scent. Or at least that is what the marketing team want you to believe. The Youth Dew Sumptuous Favorites might just make a nice gift. 
