So this month Marie Claire have produced their magazine in an environmentally friendly envelope. The Envelope boasts three logos all proclaiming its credentials (FSC printed, vegetable oils, 100% recyclable etc.)

It looks great. 

When you open up the envelope you’re faced with the same old magazine, a high gloss fashion magazine, nothing changed. 

On the one hand you can see their rationale, tap into the current thinking on environmental issues, publish a few stories and interviews with the likes of Hugh-Fearnley-Whittingface and hopefully encourage the mothers of Wandsworth and Fulham to stop using plastic carrier bags at Waitrose.

On the other hand they’re saying “Hell! We’re still a fashion mag; and a photo of  a pair of Jimmy Choos just doesn’t look as good on soya based paper !”

I can’t help but be cynical over the whole fashion industry, and this edition of the magazine highlights even more the glaring hypocrisies of this business.

On page 13, the editors letter, under the section “Fashion with a Heart” lists a bunch of things including “at Marie Claire we avoid taking unnecessary flights”.

Flick through a few pages to 282 and you’re faced with a fashion shoot shot in Tanzania !

I wouldn’t like to say how many assistants and nose-hair stylists went along for the shoot but wouldn’t it have made more sense for this particular edition to have avoided this “unnecessary flight” and shoot it in Cornwall ?

For an industry that thrives on so much waste and self-importance its hard to not be cynical over their approach, but a photoshoot to Africa with a scantily clad model surrounded by “eco” tribesmen in a magazine shouting how green and aeronautically frugal we should be, is a touch too far if you ask me.

(But I guess they’ll say they off-set it anyway) !