Yet another negative review of Conde Nast Portfolio

Dorothy Parker writes on the MediaPost web site that she believed that the reason the premiere issue of business magazine Conde Nast Portfolio had been panned by many critics it because they naturally hate anyone in the industry who is making more money — or is having lavish amounts of money spent on them.

But then she read the first issue.

Parker wrote, “Allowing for my worst instincts, I tried to bring a cruelty-free mind and less jaundiced eyes to the job. But the reading experience was far worse than I expected, in so many infuriating — and even cheesy — ways that I lost count.

“After all, how bad can the business version of Vanity Fair really be?

“Let’s put it this way — the words ‘smug’ and ‘self-satisfied’ don’t begin to cover it, although they describe the magazine pretty well.”

Later, she added, “Let’s get to the Passover question — why is this magazine different from all other magazines? I can’t find an answer. I assumed that with the existence of Forbes and Fortune, both worthy publications, one difference might be that Portfolio would target itself more to a female audience. That does not seem to be the case.”

Read more here. She gives specific examples of what’s to dislike about each article.