X Close

Is Anna Wintour’s departure the end of Vogue?

'Wintour's bob-and-sunglasses combo became the de facto symbol for the fashion industry.' Credit: Getty

'Wintour's bob-and-sunglasses combo became the de facto symbol for the fashion industry.' Credit: Getty

June 29 2025 - 5:00pm

It seems like everywhere one looks, regime change is in the air. This even applies at Vogue where, after 37 years, Anna Wintour is stepping back from her role as editor-in-chief of the American edition.

Condé Nast, the parent company which owns Vogue as well as a stable of other formerly influential titles such as Vanity Fair and GQ, has been Wintour’s employer even longer. She first joined the New York office at the beginning of the Eighties, where she was reportedly removed for undermining then editor-in-chief Grace Mirabella. She was able to fail upwards into the editorship of British Vogue, which tanked under her rule, as did House & Garden, which she is credited with bankrupting. It was her close friendship with Si Newhouse, owner of Condé Nast, which saw her installed as editor-in-chief of American Vogue in 1988.

This chequered past is usually overlooked in favor of hagiographies reporting history of a different kind: Wintour’s groundbreaking first cover, which mixed high and low fashion; how she ushered in the supermodel era of the Nineties featuring the likes of Naomi Campbell, Kate Moss and Cindy Crawford; her hard pivot in the 2010s towards pop culture, with cover stars such as Kim Kardashian and Kanye West. This last choice was particularly controversial: some saw it as savvy prophesying of how celebrity culture would engulf us, while others viewed it as a degradation of Vogue’s previous excellence.

It is unlikely that Wintour knew what these moves, which made Vogue increasingly mainstream, would mean in the long-term. Yet the current Condé Nast CEO, Roger Lynch, has a clear plan. There has been an intense restructuring taking place at the company for years now; once-powerful local editions, which celebrated regional style and textile trades, have been erased. Vogue Paris was known for being a little sexier and naughtier, German Vogue had a groomed high-glamour vibe, and Vogue Italia was a colorful fantasia which celebrated international creativity through a distinctly Italian lens. No more.

Various editors-in-chief have been moved on, most of them replaced by little-known staffers with far less star power and the rather less distinguished title “head of editorial content”. (It’s a nice cost-cutting exercise too: their salaries receive a considerable squeeze from the fat paychecks once guaranteed for an EiC.) This “content” is now shared between all the Vogues, piped out in a flattened, homogenous form that can be repackaged cheaply and reused globally.

While some outlets have kept up the half-hearted coverage of a succession plan, ranking possible heirs to Wintour’s role, others are more willing to read the writing on the wall. The truth is that, with Wintour’s departure, the title of “editor-in-chief” is likely to expire too. It was once a highly respected post, requiring uniquely talented personalities able to balance creativity and commercial nous, but modern-day publishers have fallen under the dubious spell of AI efficiency and chosen it over human skill.

In 2023, Wintour gave a keynote speech for the British Society of Magazine Editors. She spoke in expansive, vague terms about the rise of AI and how we must all learn to live with it. Had I looked closer, would I have been able to detect an ironic smile as she told the editors of today that the world they’d worked so hard for was slipping away, and she was escaping the consequences, given her age? At 75, nobody could expect her to continue the daily grind this job once required — though she will retain a string of ceremonial titles.

Still, the “restructuring” seems to have caught up with her. Even Wintour, whose bob-and-sunglasses combo became the de facto symbol for the fashion industry itself, has clearly had her time. And it doesn’t seem that Vogue itself has long left either, the once-trendsetting magazine fast slipping into irrelevance. Instead of its traditional place as a bold tastemaker, it has become a forgettable online brand which chases styles set by others.

This doesn’t mean that media is dying, as a slew of profitable independent new platforms have shown. Rather, this is what happens when you over-rely on tech and get rid of all the talent. Wintour is probably the last person at Vogue who anybody recognizes or cares about. Once she’s gone, what’s left?


Nina-Sophia Miralles is the editorial director of culture magazine LOST ART, and the author of Glossy: The Inside Story of Vogue


China is threatening America in the AI race

Reports sugget Zhipu AI  has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

Reports sugget Zhipu AI has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

July 1 2026 - 10:18am

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.


Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam