PLAYBOY's lack of oversight

[Peggy Wilkins]

>>>>> "Brian" == Brian Sorgatz <bsorgatz@hotmail.com> writes:

    >> I'm not seeing evidence that anyone is overseeing PLAYBOY to
    >> make sure the big picture works.

    Brian> Peggy, are you a manager in your day job? If so, maybe you
    Brian> can tell me whether oversight is an easier job than
    Brian> managing the details, a more suitable job for a
    Brian> semi-retired person such as Hefner.

I don't think Hefner is semi-retired, but that's a technicality of
terminology.

I wouldn't call the type of oversight I'm talking about "easy".  It is
in a sense easy, in that if you have the right person (people) doing
it, it is natural for the person doing it and all the right things
will "just happen" as a result.  But if no one has a sufficiently
large, overarching view or understanding of how all the parts fit
together into a whole (in other words, a powerful and driving vision
combined with a context to put it into), the end result will lack a
degree of polish.  When that shine is there, it can be really
impressive.  The trouble is, it is very very difficult to find people
who have all the qualities that make that "spark".  It's not something
you gather a set of resumes for and check references and
qualifications; there has to be something more there.  At least I
think so; it's my experience, and I am admittedly an elitist in this
opinion.  I guess I'm talking about something like a calling.  I think
that such a quality is absolutely essential to head a magazine of
PLAYBOY's traditional quality.  When it's not there, the overall
quality suffers.

It may sound like I am implying that the people in charge of PLAYBOY's
content today are somehow unprofessional or deficient.  I'm not saying
that, though.  I just think that something has been lost, and the
sparkle is dimming because of it.  That doesn't mean I don't respect
the talent, work, and good intentions of the people doing it.

Peggy Wilkins
mozart@lib.uchicago.edu