At least Scott Schuman is more honest than the likes of Simon Crompton - "What I don’t like is advertorial posts that are under the table." Schuman does not shill for freebies as his blog now generates substantial advertising revenue. His blog has developed like any publishing venture. He has used to the internet to build a business with several revenue streams. I don't have a problem with any of that - good luck to a clever entrepreneur.

I see two seperate issues here.  One, the blog started out as a place to post actual organic street photographs taken by Scott.  It was unique in its time (using a blog the way he did) and Scott, who was more or less an amatuer, was following in the footsteps of a long line of street photographers.  Today, he and the site have morphed into something more "professional" and less amatuer and correspondingly fas less organic and way less interesting.  No problem with any of this.  The second issue is that Scott wants people to still believe he is the same, unchanged by his success,  amatuer.  Patently false.   The Bishop is correct, he is not on the scale of Crompton who appears to be a blogger so he can shake down clothing manufacturers.  That said, Scott's blog isn't really worth paying attention to anymore--I never cared what was in Vogue or GQ.

Last edited by g- (2011-10-22 15:24:31)

I rarely look at either blog but when I have I spent more time on Cromptons, its far more interesting for me. Theres very little, infact, there isn't any substance to The Sartorialist. I mean, how many oddballs and fashion whores do you want to look at?