Vanity Fair #2

In my first blog about Vanity Fair, I talked about the difference between a short article and a feature-length article.  I had stated that the longer the article, the more substance.  To test this theory, I compared two articles in the October 2010 issue.  The first article I read was very short.  It consisted on less than half of a page.  The second article I read was nine and a half pages long, including photos.  (If the article had been text only, it would have been closer to 4 pages long.)

These two articles deny my previous claim more than they support it.  Sure, there are definitely differences between the delivery and style of the articles.  But when it comes right down to it, the articles manage to get out a similar range of information.  The shorter article is simply more to the point.  The longer article seems to drag the issue out much further.  The biggest difference seems to be that the longer article explains the background of the story pretty thoroughly.  The shorter article throws a lot of information at you without explaining it in depth.  The shorter article seems to assume that you already know about what is being covered.

The short article is titled "Once Upon a Time, at Harvard."  The main point of the article is that Mark Zuckerberg, the creator of Facebook, went to Harvard University.  But there are also many subtopics in the article.  In a very small amount of words, the author is able to cover a lot of information.  The many topics that the author covers are:

1. Mark Zuckerberg is the creator of Facebook.
2. Mark Zuckerberg attended Harvard University.

                                Those are the main points.

1. Jesse Eisenberg is the actor who plays Zuckerberg in the film The Social Network.
2. Jesse Eisenberg is wearing designer clothing in the picture for the article.
3. Zuckerberg and 3 others came up with the idea behind Facebook while attending Harvard University.  
4. The original site was the "Harvard Connection."  It was a site that aimed to merge the personal data of students in ways that Facebook later would.
5. Two of the three people that Zuckerberg worked with rowed crew in the Olympics, yet you never hear their names around town.
6. Zuckerberg won a lawsuit against the 3 others for the rights of Facebook.
7. Jesse Eisenberg relates to the role of Zuckerberg.  Both are kind and quiet, and pretty anti-social.
8. Zuckerberg is worth roughly 4 million dollars.

                         Those are the other points covered in the article.

It is crazy to think that all of that information can fit into such a short article.  It is possible simply because that is all that is included in the article.  The author assumes that the reader knows about Facebook, the movie, and everything else.  

Let's compare this to a feature-length article....

The longer article is titled "Adrift..."  It is the cover story.  On the cover, it says " From It Girl to Jailbird: Lindsay Lohan.  What went so wrong... and how she can right herself."  The description on the front cover is accurate of the main point in the article.  The article is about how a young actress who was once hailed by respected senior actresses (Jane Fonda, Tina Fey, and Meryl Streep) became a tabloid sensation and jailbird.  It is about how a respected young actress became the laughing stock of the industry.  The article is relatively long and very wordy.  Like the shorter article, it brings up many subtopics, including:

1. Lohan's distinct voice.
2. Lohan's physical appearance (hair, clothing, jewelry, spray tan).
3. Her recent altercation with a waitress.
4. The president's knowledge of her situation.
5. Allegations that Lohan stole another lady's man.
6. When she became a household name back in 2004.
7. Her childhood and early acting career.
8. The court-ordered alcohol classes that she failed to attend.
9. Her 90-day jail sentence for violating the terms of her parole.
10. Her two DUI's.  

This article covers a huge range of information about Lindsay Lohan.  It spans all the way from her childhood to the present.  It covers the good, as well as the bad. It does do in a seemingly random way.  It jumps all over the place.  What really separates it from the other article is the depth of the information.  The article briefly explains who Lindsay Lohan is.  It explains what she did to get in trouble.  It explains for past success.  It explains a whole lot.  If there is any reader who was unsure of who Lindsay Lohan was before reading the article, they sure have an idea now.

I do still believe that in most cases, the longer the article in Vanity Fair, the more importance there is to it.  In this case, however, that is not the case.  The biggest difference between these two articles, and possibly others, is the depth in which the author explains what he or she is writing about.  The magazine must assume that everyone who reads it knows what Facebook is.  (And they are probably correct with that assumption.)  The magazine probably assumes that pretty much everyone knows who Lindsay Lohan is, but that many may not know exactly what brought her to this stage of her life.  

Different articles require different amount of background information.  It seems that the shorter the article, the less background information is needed.  Maybe the magazine assumes that people know more about the topics of the shorter articles.

Photos courtesy of Vanity Fair.