Red faces at Ink Publishing whose latest edition of the Easyjet in-flight magazine has been pulped for featuring a fashion shoot set inside the holocaust memorial in Berlin.
The unsanctoned shoot was first revealed by the New Statesman earlier this week in a story which prompted Easyjet to withdraw the mag.
- August 3, 2018
- April 26, 2018
- September 16, 2013
Easyjet told the NS: “EasyJet profusely apologises to anyone who may be offended by the inappropriate fashion photo shoot at the Holocaust Memorial in Berlin featured in this month’s issue of the in-flight magazine.”
“The magazine is produced by INK – an external publishing house, and easyJet were not aware of the images until they appeared in print. As a consequence we are now reviewing our relationship with the publisher and are withdrawing this month’s issue from all flights.”
“EasyJet prides itself on bringing together a wide range of cultures and beliefs and is appalled by this insensitive and inconsiderate photo-shoot, the aim of which was to highlight some of Berlin’s iconic landmarks and certainly no offence was meant.”
Now all 300,000 copies of the issue have been pulped in a move which will surely go down in history as one of the biggest ever contract publishing blunders.
Ink claims to be one of the biggest publishers of in-flight magazines in the world.
It said in a statement that it intended the holocaust fashion shoot to be educational:
“Ink sincerely apologises for the offence caused by the fashion shoot in the November issue of easyJet inflight, two photos of which were taken in Berlin’s Holocaust Memorial. The creative direction taken was inappropriate and unacceptable.
“The aim of each monthly shoot is to highlight a destination. The shoot was intended to not only promote local design talent and the city itself, but to raise awareness of local places of import and interest. From an educational perspective, we believe it is of the utmost importance that visitors to Berlin see the Jewish Museum and the Holocaust Memorial first hand. However, the choice of a fashion shoot in this case was a clear lapse of judgement.”