Boss Baby+

March 29, 2018 3:14 AM

Reading the magazine feels like watching a wall of YouTube videos inside a Claire’s jewelry store while a tween-age life-style coach screams at you to double your net worth. The Very Unnerving Existence of Teen Boss, a Magazine for Girls. A Close Reading of Teen Boss Magazine, a Horrifying Artifact of Our Time
posted by fearfulsymmetry (30 comments total)

“i sold out in less than a week!” (The latter refers to a young person’s ice-cream inventory, not her soul.)

That, of course, had been commodified and purchased a long time before.
posted by GenjiandProust at 3:25 AM on March 29, 2018 [7 favorites]

Should magazines be considered a relevant component of the life experiences of people under the age of 30? I can't imagine teenagers consider anything to be timely if it has to wait until it's printed on paper and distributed by truck.
posted by ardgedee at 3:31 AM on March 29, 2018 [8 favorites]

I actually think I would have been interested in this magazine as a tween. The 'practical' features pointed out in the article (how to write a check, inspiration mood board) would have really excited me, compared to say reading something like Bop, when I was intimidated by the thought of boys, not titillated, or 'Teen, which was very white and focused on fashion my parents could never afford to buy me.

And speaking about being taunted by things I couldn't afford:
Teen Boss is a tribute to precocious hustle and also to the life-changing magic of already being rich.

This is so true. So much of what this magazine seems to be featuring really does need someone to have been born on third base to achieve. Just having a YouTube channel requires: A great digital video camera, a computer that can run a video editing program, a great internet connection, a nicely decorated space to use as a backdrop, and a wardrobe of cute outfits to wear because god forbid you wear the same thing twice.

And a parent (probably two) that understands all this stuff, happy to sign off and oversee your YouTube account, and savvy enough to supervise whatever sponsorship and ad opportunities that get thrown your way.

So yes, I would have read it (and in this modern age I would probably follow their Instagram) but it would have been just a different way to make me feel inadequate because I wasn't born on third base.
posted by like_neon at 3:51 AM on March 29, 2018 [16 favorites]

FWIW, I've known some very disadvantaged sixth grade kids with YouTube channels. I remember one who was a rapper. All you need is a phone with a camera.
posted by Peach at 4:06 AM on March 29, 2018 [6 favorites]

But I don't think this magazine is discovering and featuring kids who made it from disadvantaged backgrounds, or at least none of the analysis seem to notice that they do. They seem to feature the kids that can afford pretty high production values.

I mean, this girl Kenzie who is on their latest cover, her 4th oldest video on YouTube:

"I recently went on holiday to Aruba. We had a great time filming with my underwater camera!"

She was already richer than I'll ever be starting from her 4th video.
posted by like_neon at 4:19 AM on March 29, 2018 [8 favorites]

I'm not sure why I am supposed to hate this? Because it features girls? And it isn't feminine to want power and money so we need to mock girls who aspire to be in control of their lives? I'm just not sure why the snark is necessary. If there was a magazine aimed a boy entrepreneurs would we also be mocking it? Yes, the focus is on appearance, but that is hardly the fault of the girls, they are having to navigate unrealistic beauty expectations from a super young age. Is it a critique of those expectations, no, it is part of the water we swim in. But instead of focusing on the magazine both articles seem to focus on the girls and how vapid (big hair bows! Didn't know roomba existed!) they are.

Little girls are mocked enough and can't win. Let them grab power where they can within a system they didn't set up so they can dismantle the system from within. I expect these girls will really let their impact be felt in about 15 years.
posted by saucysault at 4:28 AM on March 29, 2018 [22 favorites]

I guess we hate it because Metafilter and the linked publications aren't super happy about capitalist propaganda for kids?
posted by dominik at 4:35 AM on March 29, 2018 [13 favorites]

I don't hate this as a concept -- I think teaching young women how to empower themselves financially is incredibly important. Financial independence is power for women.

I do think the whole "you are now a brand!" emphasis on girls who already had some privilege (white, rich or had been on reality shows or whatever) is a bit disturbing. But that could just be what these articles are focusing on. What about the girls who made money off fidget spinners? Or the girls who made money off of slime?

But I do think the whole idea we all need to have side hustles or be entrepreneurs is disturbing. There's no shame in having a job that pays you enough (especially if it's something you enjoy, but that's often a luxury). I feel like this magazine is definitely setting up some girls for failure ("Well, if I'd just spent more times on my YouTube videos ...") but I don't mind that it may point to another path girls may not have realized is possible.
posted by darksong at 4:41 AM on March 29, 2018 [8 favorites]

This social media kind of fame is often really fraught. You have to keep up in an extremely competitive market with a super short attention span. I honestly don't know much about the "girl" sphere, but like--in gaming, for every person who's doing great there's hundreds or thousands who are struggling and spending a ton of money on even just the hardware to try to get into the market.

A lot of these look like a lemonade stand kind of profitable: If you had to not only buy lemons and sugar but pay for the rent and electricity for the spot where you're selling the lemonade, you'd never make money, and selling lemonade is not actually particularly good practice for a kid who wants to someday run a restaurant. I'm not sure even by traditional means that teaching entrepreneurship was actually a way to encourage young people to financial independence, given the risks involved in small business versus marketable skills, as long as we have to operate within the capitalist system? But if that was questionable, this is just flat unsustainable. It might as well be kids encouraging other kids to get their parents to play the lottery.
posted by Sequence at 5:13 AM on March 29, 2018 [3 favorites]

I recall building various imaginary business empires based on Grit, Burpee Seeds, etc. way back when. Although all that stuff transpired in the most genteel way in the back of kids magazines, and not the magazine itself or Youtube.
posted by lagomorphius at 5:16 AM on March 29, 2018

I guess we hate it because Metafilter and the linked publications aren't super happy about capitalist propaganda for kids?

Perhaps we just don't think capitalism is so great that indoctrinating teenagers (regardless of gender) in its principles is a good idea.

Or maybe that's just me.
posted by tommasz at 5:17 AM on March 29, 2018 [16 favorites]

I think there are maybe better paths to self-empowerment and identity within an intersectionally feminist framework that isn't so bound up in having such an exciting amount of capital. I mean, the Slate snark is unnecessary; you can make an earnest appeal about how feminism is fundamentally at odds with capitalism - but when you have lines like

Once you have that money, two pages later, Sallie Krawcheck recommends having your parents help you find a mutual fund broker. “If you set aside $1 every day and it gets a typical rate of interest (like 4.67%), after 10 years you’ll have $4,578.59,” she advises.

it's kind of... understandable that the writer suddenly found herself in a trollish mood
posted by runt at 6:37 AM on March 29, 2018 [3 favorites]

I do think the whole "you are now a brand!" emphasis on girls who already had some privilege (white, rich or had been on reality shows or whatever) is a bit disturbing.

To be fair, the "you are now a brand" mindset is pretty pervasive throughout business today, and not just aimed at girls. If you're looking for a job, all of your materials (resume, cards, LinkedIn page, etc.) must be marketing-savvy, and strongly sell "you" akin to the latest, greatest shiny consumer gadget. It's pretty depressing, frankly.
posted by Thorzdad at 6:54 AM on March 29, 2018 [3 favorites]

it's kind of... understandable that the writer suddenly found herself in a trollish mood

That's not that far off from the advice that ask.mefi or /r/personalfinance gives out. Saving money consistently is one of the best things people can do for their finances, $365/year is not an unreasonable amount of money for a teenager to earn with things like babysitting or lawn care, and $1/day is easy to understand as "not that hard to set aside." It's a little off because ETFs are a better solution than mutual funds these days for that amount of money and the kids have a decent chance of being able to better research a broker than their parents, but saving like that will help them avoid getting caught in the debt trap of modern life. It's decidedly middle class but that's the target demographic of the publication. Should middle class teenage girls not get good financial advice until the socialist revolution flattens the classes? I've seen very similar advice given on young feminists' tumblrs.
posted by Candleman at 7:26 AM on March 29, 2018 [5 favorites]

I think the specific line of 'ask your parents to help you find a mutual fund broker' is worthy of derision especially when it's set up as a crucial part of your identity (instead of a pragmatic necessity in a fucked up system) but, as they say, everyone has different tastes
posted by runt at 7:37 AM on March 29, 2018 [3 favorites]

Hrm, I've seen this magazine mocked before, but it's because "girl boss" is a phrase people were normally associating with MLM proprietors. So now I'm wondering if this magazine is entirely separate from the MLM plague, or if there are articles promoting that as a viable business opportunity?

MLMs Take the Worst Parts of the Gig Economy, Then Make You Pay is a decent overview--you can see that the forced cheer social media blietzkrig often uses tags of #girlboss, #momtrepneur, etc etc. Cutesy phrase labels just sort of repeated over and over. And there is a lot wrong with MLMs, many of which target women who would really like better and more flexible working options compatible with childcare and who get exploited and can only be successful if they start exploiting others.
posted by foxfirefey at 7:45 AM on March 29, 2018 [7 favorites]

I don't hate this as a concept either, but I wish it were a little closer to the lost lamented Zillions instead of what it actually seems to be. (*lights a candle for Zillions*)
posted by Stacey at 7:58 AM on March 29, 2018 [11 favorites]

Teen Boss: I did it when I was a freshman, and you'll do it when you're seniors. but you're doing great. Now fry like bacon take your company public and turn it into a ten-bagger, you little freshman piggies!
posted by infinitewindow at 8:08 AM on March 29, 2018 [2 favorites]

The best part of Zillions was that it was a capitalism survival manual for kids who want to hang on to the little money they get and use it wisely, not an encouragement of cliff diving into the system it spent every issue warning you would exploit and rip you off if you weren’t vigilant.
posted by griphus at 8:21 AM on March 29, 2018 [10 favorites]

Less “Start a YouTube channel!” and more “we gave five of the most popular YouTube webcams to an angry goat to simulate what will happen when your baby brother gets a hold of it.”
posted by griphus at 8:23 AM on March 29, 2018 [2 favorites]

Does anybody else remember Penny Power magazine, or did I dream it?
posted by Don.Kinsayder at 8:39 AM on March 29, 2018 [2 favorites]

Penny Power became Zillions at some point in the '90s, so no, you did not.
posted by darksong at 8:41 AM on March 29, 2018

Color me impressed that they Sallie Krawcheck for advice.

Some girls want to kiss a teen idol. Some girls want to be the best cheerleader ever. Some girls want to be a financial success. The first two goals have magazines, why not the third?
posted by kimberussell at 8:44 AM on March 29, 2018 [7 favorites]

Jia Tolentino makes strong points about the problematic elements without mocking the people featured in the articles. In contrast, I'm super uncomfortable with the tone of the writer in the second article. From her piece:

"Ageism is one of the great injustices teen bosses are up against. Siwa, for one, frequently walks into business meetings where she’s the youngest person in the room and people try to tell her what kinds of things to post. It’s pretty messed up how much society judges 14-year-old girls in giant bows."

Uh, yeah. Actually, that is messed up. In fact, you're providing an excellent example of that kind of messed up judging right now. I'm perfectly okay with girls getting a message that they can be successful on their own terms and that the things they love and enjoy doing are valuable even if they're "girly". (The last generation got this message with Legally Blonde.)
posted by BlueBlueElectricBlue at 9:18 AM on March 29, 2018 [4 favorites]

I expect these girls will really let their impact be felt in about 15 years.

Like Trump's daughter or the Kardashians, perhaps?

Girls need good advice and strong mentors. The whole premise of this mag is gag inducing. Subsititute male for female and boy's names for girl's. Does it make a strong society? Does it help women in the long run?

Nice for the girl with the bow. I hope what she learns is positive, empowering, and benefits other women as well.
posted by BlueHorse at 9:46 AM on March 29, 2018 [1 favorite]

The most baffling line for me in the Jia Tolentino article:

For now, Teen Boss is exclusively a print publication.

Huh? What? How? Why?

A brief amount of googling indicates that, indeed, Teen Boss (or, excuse me, Teen Bo$$) Magazine's online footprint is limited to a Facebook page, an Instagram, and a perfunctory entry on their parent company's roster page. This is truly amazing to me.
posted by mhum at 9:56 AM on March 29, 2018

like_neon: "I recently went on holiday to Aruba. We had a great time filming with my underwater camera!"

Maybe just because I was reading about the Ren & Stimpy guy, but I can't help thinking about this old AskMe thread: Children Innocence and Sexuality.
posted by Chuckles at 5:38 PM on March 29, 2018

Ha! This is pretty much the sort of thing my dad would have wished we were reading as kids. He's always wanted his two daughters to be much more business-savvy, to the point of bugging my sister into taking up Economics as an A-Level subject (predictably it was the only one she didn't get an A in). I ended up being the more entrepreneurial of the two, especially after acing a business fundamentals course I took a couple of years ago, but I'm still a little too anti-capitalist for my dad's liking.

The epic pink would have probably turned me off as a teen, but at the same time it probably would have been more interesting than the fluff I had access to at the time.
posted by divabat at 7:31 PM on March 29, 2018 [1 favorite]

The tone of the Slate article is incomprehensible to me. I almost wondered if it was supposed to be sarcastic sarcasm? Like something that sounds sarcastic but isn't? Is there a word for that? The criticism is so phoned-in it doesn't even make sense.

You don’t have to be a teen to be a teen boss. You can be 11. Or middle-aged Netflix CEO Reed Hastings. The magazine is just as likely to feature established well-watched YouTubers like Zoella as it is up-and-coming tween DJs Amira and Kayla (11-year-old twin sisters from Brooklyn) or a (relatively) elder statesman like Hastings. A true teen boss will take inspiration from whosoever has the coin to provide it. Teen Boss puts Sallie Krawcheck (CEO of Ellevest, advising readers to diversify their teen portfolios) side by side with a couple of New York City kids who created a fidget-spinner empire. All that matters is that paper.

Is the criticism here genuinely that "teen boss" has content on people who are not literally teen bosses? If so, I'd like a refund for my subscription to The New Yorker on the grounds of egregious false advertising -- it has run several articles about people who aren't even Americans! Or is the problem that teenagers should not learn about potential role models who are older than them and successful in their fields?


Creating content is the most grueling possible work. (Don’t I know it!) “Put in the hours and create unique content,” YouTube star Jessie Paege advises in the magazine. “I edit for 12+ hours total and my videos can take anywhere from an hour to 12 hours to film.” Similarly, it takes Karina Garcia, YouTube’s slime queen, about 24 hours to make one of her videos. Elsewhere in the magazine, Chelsea Crockett says that the hardest part of being a successful YouTuber is “having to keep up with the content. There are some days when shooting or posting videos can seem so difficult, because there’s so many things going on in my real life or I just want to focus on being present in everyday life!” Hear that, kids? Content comes before being present in your daily life, get used to it.

Right, God forbid we should tell girls that being successful at something they're passionate about requires hard work and sacrifice. What a horrible message to send to our young people.
posted by phoenixy at 10:18 PM on March 29, 2018 [4 favorites]

My late grandpa folded the business section of the newspaper into a manageable size for my hands and gave it to me every Sunday morning. Said "it won't make sense now, but one day, you'll find yourself in a conversation and suddenly, you get it". I bless him for that every day. Time marches on I guess...
posted by lextex at 8:51 AM on April 3, 2018