Interview: Phil Hilton, Nuts magazine (Evening Standard)
By David Rowan
THERE are 56 exposed nipples in this week's edition of Nuts. That's 37 more than you'll find in Zoo, which is trailing some way behind in the battle of the men's weeklies. But if its evermore raunchy photography suggests that Nuts has abandoned its pledge to be "a magazine fathers and sons can read", the readers do not seem to mind. It sold 290,000 copies a week in its first six months, putting it 90,000 ahead of Zoo and prompting fevered speculation that IPC plans to roll out its hit formula abroad.
Phil Hilton, the 40-year-old editor, happily admits that he has been raising the skin count, despite his promise at launch that Nuts would be more "Boy's Own" than naked babes. But he has no time for the "sneering broadsheet critics" who preach about "the objectification of women". "It's easy for these journalists to complain, but if you work in a building society, and you've had a pretty dismal day, you can open the magazine and see all these topless girls on a yacht. And you think, 'I'd love to be on that yacht, I'll get back to the accounts later.' That's what it's all about."
If men wish to look at attractive, partially clothed women, it doesn't mean, Hilton suggests, that they want to take away the female vote.
The magazine, he insists, would never exploit women. "Most guys are reasonable blokes with partners they respect and a very modern attitude to women," he says.
"They are not comfortable buying something exploitative or pornographic.
It's all about picking an image which shows a woman having a good time."
A recent feature on the porn star Jenna Jameson, for instance, was stringently vetted for the reader's sensitivities. "There were no pictures there that our mainstream audience could find offensive, which took some doing," he says.
"We make it look very easy, very casual, but we work for hours to make sure not one single image is inappropriate or offensive.
Whenever I meet someone at a party, they immediately think that your working day is poring over endless pictures of women. And, well, yes, it is - but we take it very seriously, and it's easy to get it wrong."
Nor does Nuts merely appeal to men, he says. Each week, it receives "a steady stream" of photographs from "super-sexy" women readers hoping to model in its pages.
"The feminists are missing the point," says Hilton, a former editor of Men's Health and Later.
"Women feel comfortable having their pictures appearing in a magazine like Nuts. They want to be considered attractive. Both men and women today are much more sexually comfortable with themselves."
Still, he is not that much of a "new man". "We cast the girls in this very room, once we've closed the blinds and checked they haven't massively put on weight since they sent in their shot," he explains in his South Bank meeting room. "You can pay for their train fare, only to find they've been at the pies and ballooned to 16 stone."
ONE woman who consistently lifts sales is Abi Titmuss, whom Hilton says can currently move tens of thousands of extra copies. "It's because Abi's a real person who has experienced real life," he says. He is not surprised by a report this week that Titmuss has earned £1 million in the past year.
"I can absolutely believe that. I'm fascinated by Abi. Having come so quickly from being a nurse, she's clearly delighted with what she's doing.
She was recently here as our guest editor, and she'd be saying, 'This is amazing, I was changing bed pans only a short time ago.' That comes across in the pictures."
Jordan, too, still delivers sales.
Hilton has just been weighing which of two Jordan photos to use on his next cover. "She's still fascinating, very smart, totally in control. I'm sorry to disappoint the enraged feminists, but Jordan is not someone you'd dream of exploiting. She'd destroy you."
As for male role models, Johnny Vegas and the Little Britain team are current sure bets. "If you can make blokes laugh on TV, they're interested in anything about you."
The monthly men's sector is in deep trouble, Hilton believes. "With the monthlies, you have to make a complex decision at the newsstand about what sort of person you are - a GQ guy? A Maxim guy? But the weeklies are an easy purchase that don't make you decide that. So we're straight in with the things all guys like."
Besides, the monthlies' editors are too busy pleasing their highend advertisers to think about the reader. "I find it hard to read magazines like GQ and get excited. It seems like an endless churn about the latest film, with the star saying this is their best film yet, and then a long piece on shoes, because they think long is better than concise.
It's all so insincere, so hollow."
Nuts does not do "long". But Hilton, a Muswell Hill-based father of two, is infuriated at criticisms that its focus on babes, cars and sensation is "lowest common denominator" journalism. "There's nothing low about it," he says a little angrily. "So our coverage of developments in the European Community is limited. Our readers can go elsewhere for that. They come to us to have a good time. It would get dull just watching Newsnight, you know."
The broadsheet "snobs", he says, should look to their own journalistic failings. "Anyone can write think pieces. But putting together a magazine like Nuts is incredibly demanding. It's hard to find a guy who's had half his arm chewed off in a tractor accident and carried his own limb back to hospital ... " HE ALSO has a few thoughts on his weekly rivals. "What I hate about Zoo is its yobby tone and the fact that it doesn't read like a magazine for smart guys," he says. "If Zoo was a person, I wouldn't want to be stuck in a lift with him." Bauer's Cut, the most troubled of the weeklies, is merely "sad". "I feel for them," Hilton says. "It's humiliating - this is a big stage on which to fall over."
So what next for Nuts? Hilton would be "absolutely thrilled" to see IPC's parent company, Time Warner, publish a US edition, but will not disclose how far plans have gone. As for suggestions that it will publish more than once a week to take on the red-tops, the very idea is "exhausting". Still, The Sun has refused the magazine's advertising, which delights him. "The Sun is standing on a chair pulling up its skirts, and we've only been around for 10 months. It's great that they see us as real competition."
So how far can Nuts expand? "Oh, there's still plenty of room to grow, and circulation is rising extremely steeply," he says. Besides, he reckons there must still be a few hermits out there who have yet to try his magazine. "Or," he adds with a smile, "some broadsheet readers."
(Evening Standard, October 21, 2004)
THERE are 56 exposed nipples in this week's edition of Nuts. That's 37 more than you'll find in Zoo, which is trailing some way behind in the battle of the men's weeklies. But if its evermore raunchy photography suggests that Nuts has abandoned its pledge to be "a magazine fathers and sons can read", the readers do not seem to mind. It sold 290,000 copies a week in its first six months, putting it 90,000 ahead of Zoo and prompting fevered speculation that IPC plans to roll out its hit formula abroad.
Phil Hilton, the 40-year-old editor, happily admits that he has been raising the skin count, despite his promise at launch that Nuts would be more "Boy's Own" than naked babes. But he has no time for the "sneering broadsheet critics" who preach about "the objectification of women". "It's easy for these journalists to complain, but if you work in a building society, and you've had a pretty dismal day, you can open the magazine and see all these topless girls on a yacht. And you think, 'I'd love to be on that yacht, I'll get back to the accounts later.' That's what it's all about."
If men wish to look at attractive, partially clothed women, it doesn't mean, Hilton suggests, that they want to take away the female vote.
The magazine, he insists, would never exploit women. "Most guys are reasonable blokes with partners they respect and a very modern attitude to women," he says.
"They are not comfortable buying something exploitative or pornographic.
It's all about picking an image which shows a woman having a good time."
A recent feature on the porn star Jenna Jameson, for instance, was stringently vetted for the reader's sensitivities. "There were no pictures there that our mainstream audience could find offensive, which took some doing," he says.
"We make it look very easy, very casual, but we work for hours to make sure not one single image is inappropriate or offensive.
Whenever I meet someone at a party, they immediately think that your working day is poring over endless pictures of women. And, well, yes, it is - but we take it very seriously, and it's easy to get it wrong."
Nor does Nuts merely appeal to men, he says. Each week, it receives "a steady stream" of photographs from "super-sexy" women readers hoping to model in its pages.
"The feminists are missing the point," says Hilton, a former editor of Men's Health and Later.
"Women feel comfortable having their pictures appearing in a magazine like Nuts. They want to be considered attractive. Both men and women today are much more sexually comfortable with themselves."
Still, he is not that much of a "new man". "We cast the girls in this very room, once we've closed the blinds and checked they haven't massively put on weight since they sent in their shot," he explains in his South Bank meeting room. "You can pay for their train fare, only to find they've been at the pies and ballooned to 16 stone."
ONE woman who consistently lifts sales is Abi Titmuss, whom Hilton says can currently move tens of thousands of extra copies. "It's because Abi's a real person who has experienced real life," he says. He is not surprised by a report this week that Titmuss has earned £1 million in the past year.
"I can absolutely believe that. I'm fascinated by Abi. Having come so quickly from being a nurse, she's clearly delighted with what she's doing.
She was recently here as our guest editor, and she'd be saying, 'This is amazing, I was changing bed pans only a short time ago.' That comes across in the pictures."
Jordan, too, still delivers sales.
Hilton has just been weighing which of two Jordan photos to use on his next cover. "She's still fascinating, very smart, totally in control. I'm sorry to disappoint the enraged feminists, but Jordan is not someone you'd dream of exploiting. She'd destroy you."
As for male role models, Johnny Vegas and the Little Britain team are current sure bets. "If you can make blokes laugh on TV, they're interested in anything about you."
The monthly men's sector is in deep trouble, Hilton believes. "With the monthlies, you have to make a complex decision at the newsstand about what sort of person you are - a GQ guy? A Maxim guy? But the weeklies are an easy purchase that don't make you decide that. So we're straight in with the things all guys like."
Besides, the monthlies' editors are too busy pleasing their highend advertisers to think about the reader. "I find it hard to read magazines like GQ and get excited. It seems like an endless churn about the latest film, with the star saying this is their best film yet, and then a long piece on shoes, because they think long is better than concise.
It's all so insincere, so hollow."
Nuts does not do "long". But Hilton, a Muswell Hill-based father of two, is infuriated at criticisms that its focus on babes, cars and sensation is "lowest common denominator" journalism. "There's nothing low about it," he says a little angrily. "So our coverage of developments in the European Community is limited. Our readers can go elsewhere for that. They come to us to have a good time. It would get dull just watching Newsnight, you know."
The broadsheet "snobs", he says, should look to their own journalistic failings. "Anyone can write think pieces. But putting together a magazine like Nuts is incredibly demanding. It's hard to find a guy who's had half his arm chewed off in a tractor accident and carried his own limb back to hospital ... " HE ALSO has a few thoughts on his weekly rivals. "What I hate about Zoo is its yobby tone and the fact that it doesn't read like a magazine for smart guys," he says. "If Zoo was a person, I wouldn't want to be stuck in a lift with him." Bauer's Cut, the most troubled of the weeklies, is merely "sad". "I feel for them," Hilton says. "It's humiliating - this is a big stage on which to fall over."
So what next for Nuts? Hilton would be "absolutely thrilled" to see IPC's parent company, Time Warner, publish a US edition, but will not disclose how far plans have gone. As for suggestions that it will publish more than once a week to take on the red-tops, the very idea is "exhausting". Still, The Sun has refused the magazine's advertising, which delights him. "The Sun is standing on a chair pulling up its skirts, and we've only been around for 10 months. It's great that they see us as real competition."
So how far can Nuts expand? "Oh, there's still plenty of room to grow, and circulation is rising extremely steeply," he says. Besides, he reckons there must still be a few hermits out there who have yet to try his magazine. "Or," he adds with a smile, "some broadsheet readers."
(Evening Standard, October 21, 2004)
<< Home