GQ Magazine, whose target demographic is metrosexual men with more disposable income than sense in how and where to  use it, has a feature called “Regrets,” showing off fashion looks that only the blind would have found appealing:

I don’t think Lands’ End has ever had “regrets” of this kind. Lands’ End is known for classic fashion, clothing that is basic and timeless, not even particularly contemporary.

What do GQ and Lands’ End have in common? Good question, based on what the New York Times reports:

The free magazine was meant as a gift from Lands’ End — the retailer known for its conservative, sturdy clothing — to its most valued customers.

But when the July issue of GQ landed in mailboxes across the country, the cover model was not wearing a monogrammed oxford or polar fleece. Instead, she was topless except for a strategically placed white flower lei. And some of the company’s shoppers were none too pleased.

“My 14-year-old son brought in the mail today & was quite disturbed & fascinated by a ‘gift’ Lands’ End sent us — a copy of GQ magazine with an absolutely OBSCENE cover!!!,” wrote one mother on the company’s Facebook page, which filled up with dozens of complaints. “I am appalled that Lands’ End — which I have always thought of as a ‘wholesome,’ family-oriented company — would be the one to expose my son to pornography!”

Another said: “We received your ‘Lands’ End Bonus’ of GQ magazine this weekend, and we are absolutely horrified. How can buying something as family friendly as school uniforms lead to soft porn in the mailbox? I’m thankful my son did not bring in the mail.”

Snapped another, “I ordered Christian private school children’s uniforms from your company and you sold my home address to a magazine company that peddles in soft porn for men???.”

The GQ promotion was part of a yearlong deal that Lands’ End, based in Dodgeville, Wis., had struck with the magazine’s New York publisher, Condé Nast. The idea was to reward its best customers with magazines “highlighting fashion and lifestyle topics.” Previously, as part of the arrangement, the company had sent readers copies of other popular magazines like Self, Vogue and Glamour.

Such partnerships between retailers and magazines are hardly new, but have grown in recent years as magazines have been increasingly eager to find new distribution channels for their product in hopes of gaining new subscribers as fewer people buy print magazines.

But in this case, the promotion backfired, with GQ’s racy cover of the model and actress Emily Ratajkowski offending some of Lands’ End’s customers. By Wednesday, the negative reaction had grown so strong that the retailer issued a mea culpa to its shoppers.

This is the offending cover …

… which is actually one-third more tame than the most recent Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue cover:

 

The main difference, of course, is that when one subscribes to SI, one assumes that includes the Swimsuit Issue. (Which includes models wearing nothing but body paint. No, I’m not going to post one of those; find them yourself, pervert.) These Lands’ End customers apparently didn’t expect to get GQ, or at least a GQ with this kind of cover.

You are free to roll your eyes at the prudery of these offended parents. The bigger issue isn’t that they’re offended parents; it’s that they are offended customers. And that is Lands’ End’s fault. A perusal of just a couple of issues of GQ should have made Lands’ End conclude that GQ was a bad fit for Lands’ End. (As are, by the way, Vogue and Glamour, and perhaps Conde Nast Traveler, which Lands’ End customers apparently are now receiving.)

The Times adds:

A giveaway gone awry is the least of the magazine industry’s problems. Circulation and newsstand sales have declined precipitously over the last decade. And to offset those declines, magazines are pushing into numerous new initiatives and partnerships.

For decades, Hearst Corporation has had ventures with television networks like HGTV Magazine and Food Network Magazine. Just this week, Condé Nast announced that it would work with an e-commerce platform called BeachMint to run Lucky Magazine and with Bravo on a new television series called “Best New Restaurant.”

While many of these partnerships exploit magazines’ brands to sell products — Better Homes and Gardens has a line of curtains and cookware at Walmart, for example — some are an attempt to get their magazines into the hands of new customers and potential subscribers.

Lands’ End’s botched promotion comes months after Sears spun off the retailer into an independent publicly traded company. (Sears acquired Lands’ End in 2002 for $1.9 billion.) As part of an effort to keep its brand fresh, Lands’ End has added a touch more stylishness to its more traditional merchandise in hopes of attracting younger shoppers. Glossy fashion magazines would seem to align with that ambition.

And while GQ is a long-respected voice on men’s fashion and home to narrative journalism, the magazine’s image has evolved in recent years — especially its covers. Until recently, the covers rarely featured women, instead opting for portraits of celebrities like Muhammad Ali or Sean Connery. But now, scantily clad women — Jennifer Aniston, Kate Upton, Rihanna — are routinely featured on its covers. Ms. Ratajkowski first gained notice in the music video for Robin Thicke’s hit song “Blurred Lines”; in October, she will appear in the film adaptation of the novel “Gone Girl.”

Many angry customers wondered why Lands’ End was not aware of GQ’s risqué photos and provocative content. “In the future, we will work more closely to assess content to make sure it is aligned with our well-known, long-held company values and those of our customers,” said Michele Casper, a company spokeswoman.

Yes, but while babes may not have been on past GQ covers, babes have been inside GQ’s pages, which, again, a perusal of a couple of issues would have confirmed. As it is, even “a touch more stylishness” is unlikely to attract the attention of GQ readers. GQ also takes the fashionably liberal line with its choice of editorial, which again would have been an issue for some Lands’ End customers.

There is, however, some delicious irony to the Times’ snarky reporting, which Smarter Times reports:

The “New York Times Store” is featuring “rarely seen” and “truly historic” photographs of a naked Marilyn Monroe for $3,000 and $1,500 (more if you want it framed). It’s not clear how this fits with the Times Company’s stated core mission of “creating, collecting, and distributing high-quality news and information.” A front-of-the business section Times news article — “Risque Promotion Prompts Outcry From Land’s End Customers” — this week went after Land’s End for a marketing deal with GQ, which was featuring photographs of scantily clad women, but Land’s End wasn’t trying to sell the pictures for $3,000 or billing them as “truly historic.”

The less expensive of the two shows quite a bit more of Ms. Monroe than GQ shows of Ms. Ratajkowski, either inside or outside of GQ.