Zoomer debate rages on like seniors at the early bird special
The battle of the olds hit the airwaves Tuesday when Zoomer editor Suzanne Boyd debated National Post contributor Mireille Silcoff on CBC Radio’s Q regarding Silcoff’s editorial about the magazine’s hypocritical stance on aging.
“Why is it not OK to be an older person and relax?” Silcoff asked. “I don’t consider peer pressure the fact that you want to encourage people to live longer, healthier lives,” retorted Boyd. “We’re not telling anyone to have fab abs. We’re saying strengthen your abs so that you can have less back pain and increased mobility.” Yeah, sure.
In a letter to the Post, Zoomer owner Moses Znaimer accused Silcoff of being insecure about aging. Silcoff, who’s 37, explained that she’s been living with a spinal cord condition that rendered her a “frail 80-year-old woman,” and says her life was a living hell when she tried to wear heels and embody the zippy lifestyle Zoomer promotes. Snap. “As soon as I learned to accept and live with the deck that had been handed to me, a new horizon opened up and I learned how to live deeply and beautifully.”
A lovely thought, but lifestyle magazines are akin to Cosmo. Sure, they’re filled with mixed messages about aging gracefully while getting Botox, but we think readers (especially ones in their 60s) know to take advice with a grain of salt and a dash of humour. But if instances of elderly onset anorexia begin to rise, we’ll know who to blame.
This debate is so Tuesday-ago…. most have moved onto the pro’s & con’s of THE BABY FOOD DIET.
Of course Zoomer Magazine is schizophrenic. It’s written for a 45 year old audience in a cynical attempt to generate advertising dollars while 95% of the magazine’s circulation is to CARP members whose average age is 69 years. The ideas was to produce a younger focused magazine to drive new CARP memberships but it has been a dismal failure. Newsstand sales are meager at best. Advertisers who think they’re getting fashionable younger boomers are actually reaching an audience with no interest or intent to purchase. It is the height of chuzpah for Znaimer to think that the attitudes, behaviours and values of people born in 1941 are in any way similar to echo boomers born in 1965 simply shows how out of touch he is today. For Ms Silcoff to be off-base would suggest that Mr Znaimer is wrong and anyone who’s ever worked with him would know that is not possible.