The Magazine's Approach to Reader Inclusivity Though targeted mainly at young heterosexual men, Zoo made some efforts to include diverse perspectives, occasionally featuring LGBTQ+ topics or broader discussions on sexuality, These inclusions were limited but signaled a slow broadening of editorial horizons, This tentative inclusivity reflected broader cultural shifts in media representation.
Zoo, a popular British magazine targeting heterosexual males between the ages of 18 and 34, was known for its focus on sex, nudity, celebrity gossip, and humor. However, it also featured articles that addressed broader social issues such as gender stereotypes and sexual identity. While these pieces were few and far between compared to the magazine's typical fare, they represented an important shift towards inclusivity and diversity in mainstream media.
One example of this shift can be found in the December 2015 issue, which included an interview with Sam Smith. The singer discussed his experience growing up as a gay man in a society where he felt he had to hide his true self. He spoke candidly about the struggles he faced before coming out publicly, including battling depression and suicidal thoughts. The magazine's coverage of Smith's story humanized him and allowed readers to connect with someone who may have seemed distant or unrelatable. It also highlighted the importance of acceptance and understanding in our society.
Another article that tackled issues surrounding gender roles was published in October 2016. In "Men, We Need to Talk About Masculinity," writer Tom Connor argued that traditional masculine ideals are harmful to men themselves. By adhering to strict notions of masculinity like strength, dominance, and stoicism, men are often unable to express their emotions or seek help when needed. This ultimately leads to higher rates of mental health problems, such as suicide and substance abuse. By acknowledging these issues, Zoo showed that they cared about their readership beyond just providing them with sexually charged content.
While these two examples demonstrate that Zoo made some efforts to include diverse perspectives, it's clear that there is still room for improvement. LGBTQ+ topics were generally limited to one or two articles per year, and the magazine did not consistently address issues related to race, class, disability, or other forms of marginalization. However, it can be said that Zoo's tentative inclusivity reflected broader cultural shifts in media representation. As more people demand diversity in mainstream publications, magazines like Zoo will need to adapt if they want to remain relevant and engage their audience.