What happened to the NYT wedding section?

[Anonymous]

We were in the wedding announcement section a few years ago. I suppose you could say we are “strivers” in that we both achieved career and academic success despite being first generation Americans with middle class immigrant parents. I guess that offends some people in this thread. I think we’re interesting even if we didn’t “prep” or “summer”!

[Anonymous]

'love section' comes back but the focus will be on blue color workers living in the burroughs and inner city NJ, some of which did hard time, but are proud the time is behind them.

[Anonymous]

NYT makes it official they are switching to to “mini-vows” and ditching the older style announcements.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/12/insider/committed-meaning-wedding-section.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I miss the old the ones, esp the ones back in the day when we found out where the bride and groom prepped, where they summered and who the attendants were.

Now it's boring and too PC. Yes, I am a snob.

Lots of the "old families" are gone from NYC. The money was split between too many descendants and they sold off the family homes to wealthy foreigners and developers. Their heirs scattered to the winds to FL, TX, CA, CT, the Cape, and Hudson Valley on a permanent basis. The "old families" can't even get into their legacy prep schools because their kids are competing with the kids of Asian, Eurasian, and Latin American billionaires who can write $1m checks for the development fund. The exclusive parts of Manhattan are so much more diverse than even 30 years ago. All the people I know in finance from the "old families" don't even keep a pied a terre in the city anymore, given the rise of nice corporate apartments and AirBnB.

Times have changed considerably.

Well put. I’d still rather read about these families, where ever they live, than the cringe weddings they feature now. Or so over the top “inclusive” and forced. It’s awful.

You’re describing the whole NYTimes now, especially the Style section.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I miss the old the ones, esp the ones back in the day when we found out where the bride and groom prepped, where they summered and who the attendants were.

Now it's boring and too PC. Yes, I am a snob.

Lots of the "old families" are gone from NYC. The money was split between too many descendants and they sold off the family homes to wealthy foreigners and developers. Their heirs scattered to the winds to FL, TX, CA, CT, the Cape, and Hudson Valley on a permanent basis. The "old families" can't even get into their legacy prep schools because their kids are competing with the kids of Asian, Eurasian, and Latin American billionaires who can write $1m checks for the development fund. The exclusive parts of Manhattan are so much more diverse than even 30 years ago. All the people I know in finance from the "old families" don't even keep a pied a terre in the city anymore, given the rise of nice corporate apartments and AirBnB.

Times have changed considerably.

Well put. I’d still rather read about these families, where ever they live, than the cringe weddings they feature now. Or so over the top “inclusive” and forced. It’s awful.

You’re describing the whole NYTimes now, especially the Style section.

Lol so true

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You mean these?

https://www.nytimes.com/section/fashion/weddings

Those aren't announcements.

An announcement is "Mr and Mrs. Van Der Wort are please to announce the wedding of their daughter Hortense to Mr. Joseph Gorstein on November 4, 2021. The Gorsteins will reside in Greenwich after a honeymoon in Italy."

The NY Times had announcements up until about 2000. Now they have these little stories.

They published our announcement right before. But I could tell they were trying to interview me to get a minivow story out of it. It felt kind of invasive TBH. We aren't celebrities and I kept thinking no one wants to know about our first date or how I proposed...

[Anonymous]

The readership demographics have heavily changed too. The families of the past who used to appear in the wedding announcements no longer read the NYT. And the NYT doesn't write for them anymore, either. It writes for a very specific progressive-left culture.

I'm not quite sure what to make of the current NYT. In a way it's become even more out of touch than it ever was, but it a distinctly different way. Few normal Americans can relate to many of the unusual partnerships you see featured in the NYT these days. And the ideology is also distinctly different.

Too bad. It used to be a great paper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The readership demographics have heavily changed too. The families of the past who used to appear in the wedding announcements no longer read the NYT. And the NYT doesn't write for them anymore, either. It writes for a very specific progressive-left culture.

I'm not quite sure what to make of the current NYT. In a way it's become even more out of touch than it ever was, but it a distinctly different way. Few normal Americans can relate to many of the unusual partnerships you see featured in the NYT these days. And the ideology is also distinctly different.

Too bad. It used to be a great paper.

“Unusual partnerships”? You mean gay people and people of color? We are normal too, grandma.

[Anonymous]

I hate "the Vows" section. I used to read it religiously back in the day (okay, 15-20 years ago). It's modernized in the worst way, where couples present the Instagrammed version of their relationship, i.e., more opinions, less facts.

There is a way to be inclusive without being so cutesy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The readership demographics have heavily changed too. The families of the past who used to appear in the wedding announcements no longer read the NYT. And the NYT doesn't write for them anymore, either. It writes for a very specific progressive-left culture.

I'm not quite sure what to make of the current NYT. In a way it's become even more out of touch than it ever was, but it a distinctly different way. Few normal Americans can relate to many of the unusual partnerships you see featured in the NYT these days. And the ideology is also distinctly different.

Too bad. It used to be a great paper.

“Unusual partnerships”? You mean gay people and people of color? We are normal too, grandma.

It was a gay man you were responding to.

Complex identities may be a better term than unusual partnerships.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dunno, I don't read them like I used to, but this was fabulous:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/03/style/zack-clark-zack-lewis-wedding.html

What a wonderful story!!

Mr. Clark, 36, a children’s book author and editor at Scholastic, had offered Mr. Lewis, 35, his card before excusing himself to the bathroom at the Phoenix Bar. “You’re not going to believe this,” Mr. Lewis said to Mr. Clark when he returned from that expedition.