This week, we learned that Conde Nast had made the decision to ban Terry Richardson from shooting any editorials for any of their publications. The announcement wasn’t really an announcement – it was an in-house email to various magazine editors, although I’m sure the email was designed to be leaked. Conde Nast wanted to get credit for finally taking some kind of stand against a well-known pervert with a long history of harassing and assaulting women. For what it’s worth (not much), Richardson did offer a statement through his representative:
“Terry is disappointed to hear about this email especially because he has previously addressed these old stories. He is an artist who has been known for his sexually explicit work so many of his professional interactions with subjects were sexual and explicit in nature but all of the subjects of his work participated consensually.”
Again, people aren’t complaining of the “sexualy explicit” WORK. The complaints have always been about how Richardson behaved towards models, how he uses the lure of “pose for me, I’ll make you famous” to assault, harass, demean and humiliate women. It takes brass balls to say “all of the subjects of his work participated consensually” when there are a dozen women who have come out publicly to say that they didn’t consent to various things. That being said, yes, the work sucks too. I’ve never understood why Richardson was an in-demand photographer because his photography isn’t good. Anyway, in case you’re feeling conspiratorial, Page Six had this story on the Richardson issue:
Fashion insiders say something’s fishy about Condé Nast’s apparently out-of-the-blue decision to “blacklist” Terry Richardson on Monday — years after he was accused of sexual harassment during photo shoots (which he’s denied). An industry vet said, “I thought they blacklisted him a long time ago! They put out statements several years ago when all his creepy sex stuff started coming out.”
Added another, “I don’t think he’s shot for American Vogue for years.” In 2014, a Vogue rep told the Wrap, “The last assignment Terry Richardson had for US Vogue appeared in the July 2010 issue and we have no plans to work with him in the future.”
The timing of the ban makes sources believe Condé Nast may be using the Harvey Weinstein scandal for PR points. After Condé Nast’s ban was revealed, fashion companies lined up to distance themselves from Richardson. Valentino told Page Six its “last campaign with [him] was shot in July 2017 — there are no plans on a future campaign.” Bulgari, who used Richardson this year for a campaign with Bella Hadid, said “there are no plans of working with him again at this time.”
As I said, I think it’s more than possible that Conde Nast corporate wants “credit” for banning Richardson and that this is a PR move. But it’s also worth noting that in the wake of the Harvey Weinstein scandal, there has been a renewed conversation about harassment and abuse within the fashion industry, and many people and many media outlets were name-checking Richardson specifically. The Sunday Times of London and The Guardian both ran articles questioning why Richardson was still being hired to shoot campaigns and editorials for international Vogue issues. The leaked email was likely strategy by Conde Nast as an answer to those criticisms. Better late than never? I guess. But it feels like we’re setting the bar so low.
Photos courtesy of Getty.
not nearly as disappointed as the rest of us are that you even have a career, you slimy worm. you are human garbage. karma’s a bitch baby! enjoy
Oh he’s so edgy with the sex stuff. *insert massive eyeroll* I googled his work a bit yesterday and I regret it. I can see how his aesthetic hit a nerve in the mid-90s, fashion photography was going in that direction and everyone was obsessed with ill-looking people and that Polaroid-look. But most of his explicit work is just … so juvenile. If his point has been to shock, I want to know who’s still shocked by p0rn? I find fashion and advertisement so exhausting sometimes with their “provocative” campaigns. I honestly don’t know who thinks he’s some great artist. Gross does not equal thought provoking.
This! Also had to Google yesterday, and all I could think was that TR’s “best work” looks exactly like the dumb pictures my friends and I took of ourselves in college. And also that poor Obama looks so uncomfortable.
Oh please. Obama does not look uncomfortable at all.
Meanwhile anja rubik claims those girls are the only one who can be blame for their sexual harassment because she never had such problems
OMG he is so disgusting looking that my stomach turns every time I see a picture. It’s as if he was sent from central casting as “pervy uncle”.
His goose is cooked.
Wasn’t he Jennifer Aniston’s wedding photographer? She gets a pass on everything under the sun because, ‘Waaaah Brad left meeeee.’
That’s a bizarre stretch. He took ‘A’ (one) photo because he is her busbands best friend. Nothing to do with Brad. But dragggg her into it, because?? Sorry. Why?
People around here can’t help themselves. He photographed someone else’s wedding too. And Obama. So many people. I don’t even care to look it up. It is so transparent. But at least it tells you which commenters only care about this to trash their least favorite celebs. I’ve seen a ton of that. Can we start worrying more about the abusers and their crimes please.
I agree with what was said yesterday that personal issues people have with certain celebrities have no place here.
Yes he took more then one photo of Jen. He is her husband best friend and he was their wedding photographer. Justin a has also gone to bat for Terry and promoted his work. Having said that Justin and Jen aren’t the only ones, Lady Gaga and her coffee book, Milly and her sick Me too shirt, Beyoncé, Ann Wintour the Kardashains and so on. All of these people knew what type of scum bag he is and still decided to work with him and ignore or made light of his victims.
We heard rumors, and read articles about him fo years and only in 2017 someone realizes he is a predator ? No comment.
He is soooo creepy! I googled his work today. There are hardcore pics of him dangling his dick in the photos, screwing the models, getting BJs, etc. It’s all proof. Freak!!
I know Norman Reedus and I guess Aaron Paul are friends with him. I was also disappointed that he photographed President Obama 😞
I made the mistake of googling his work and, wow, that was a lot more BJs and dicks than I thought I was going to see. How could he possibly say every single shot was consensual??? Perhaps one or two of them were, but I doubt every model wanted to be photographed with his penis in her mouth.
I think he has a warped view of consent, and chooses to ignore power dynamics. If someone who has the power to make or break your career asks you to do something, it’s a lot more difficult to refuse. If you go along with one thing you weren’t entirely comfortable with, it becomes psychologically more difficult to say no to the more extreme thing. Richardson clearly takes advantage of this, then tries to claim it’s all ok because the person signed a form. It’s not, it’s coercion, and the fact that so many of his “subjects” have spoken publicly about their humiliation and regret demonstrates this.
May of his victims have said that they were drugged. His assistant put something in their tea when the models start to feel uncomfortable or do what to do a certain pose.
I just realized.. sexual assault in America is also a butt clap. Then I have been sexually aussaulted all my life.. by an old guy on a party, where my mom was present, in a club once and the bouncer didn‘t care and once my teacher on a field trip. And that‘s only what I remember.
I don’t care why they’re doing it. I just want him gone.
He is horrible.
It’s not out of the blue. People have been actively asking about other high profile predators and Richardson’s name has come up countless times.
And just a little hint Terry: coerced consent isn’t really consent. A-hole.
While I would side eye everyone using this terrible time for PR I think in this case like Kaiser said: People were talking and asking so its ok to put it out there.
Also nice to see Cara Delevingnes mom.
He’d be more disappointed to be in jail, where he belongs.
The fact that the conversation around disballance of power and sexist, possesive atitude towards women encourages sexual harrasment and abuse I take this move not only as an opportunity for PR but sort of opportunistic move to expel a member of the system in order to keep the system in place. Like, we got rid of the perve everyone knew is a pervert. Sort of the way to close the gates and prevent the flood. Because I am sure that fashion industry is full of perverts like that, O mean this is an industry where humiliation and critique of women’s appearance is a way to make money. And all the parts of the system including fashion magazines probably do not want all that talk about the need to change the system something some of the people in Hollywood hoped for after the HW scandal.
He’s so gross. If anything involves drugs, alcohol, coercion, manipulation, psychological abuse, a skewed power dynamic, confusion, false promises, thinly veiled threats, or blackmail, emotional blackmail or otherwise, IT IS NOT CONSENT. Ugh. So sick of these a holes with their “it was consensual” lines. No. It was not. Hope he never works again. He deserves prison.
I’m waiting for him to be very afraid. Right now he thinks he still has stature. I want him taken down even more than taking down Weinstein.
His work is atrocious, his style of photography is just harsh. I don’t know why he became such a huge name.
I don’t care what the reason was – good riddance.
Now someone needs to go after Hearst too, because I’m pretty sure this piece of shit is still shooting covers and editorial for Harper’s Bazaar etc. And the big indie magazines like i-D (now under Vice, go figure) or Dazed&Confused, etc.