Last week, we reported on the mysteriously delicious new Twitter account that had the whole fashion world smitten and intrigued -- and those working at publishing titan Conde Nast a little uneasy: @CondeElevator. An alleged magazine insider was reporting the various bitchy repartee that takes place in the claustrophobic chambers that jettison some of the fashion world's biggest players (Anna Wintour, included) to their offices in the sky. News of this new account set the blogsophere into overdrive, with everyone reporting on the funniest quips, the most pointedly condescending exchanges and the clear pecking order set forth by the publishing company. But two things intrigued bloggers everywhere most of all: first -- was this in fact real, or just a clever fashion dork with a great idea -- and secondly -- if this was, in fact, real, who was this mysterious insider spilling the secrets of Conde's elite?
And then, as suddenly as it appeared, the mysterious Tweeter disappeared, dishing his or her last tweet on August 11th, a day or two after the account's tipping point into online media infamy. In it's wake Gawker looked to the account's first ten followers searching for some sign as to who it could be, noting that there was a heavy representation of GQ's editorial team -- they smelled a rat a the men's mag.
For those of you who have ever been honored (or cursed) to walk the hallowed halls and tension-filled elevators at Conde (we have), there are certain unspoken rules of conduct and protocol to adhere to. With each magazine it shifts slightly, but for the most part its clear that the company encourages an intense sense of seriousness and fosters a cold, aloof demeanor. Sure, this isn't true of everyone, but the overall feel is that this is an important place to work and should be treated as such. So it was with some pandering pretense that "Page Six" reported that the company was not "overly concerned" by the account's musings on the day-to-day details at 4 Times Square, and were actually "flattered" that people were even interested (we can just imagine some PR flack writing that email while the higher-ups run around screaming to find the anonymous Tweeter and have them destroyed.)
Then there were the copy cats: @HearstElevatorz and @GSElevators sad attempts to piggy-back on the original source, by chronicling the happenings inside elevators at the Hearst Building and at Goldman Sachs -- but lets be honest, unless its Gail and Oprah talking about O Magazine, we're definitely not caring. Then, finally, a possible suspect arose (via The Daily Beast): John Jannuzzi (@JohnJannuzzi) an editor at Lucky. Once the editor heard he was being called out, his response was swift and immediate: "This is fucking ridiculous" he declared on Twitter, well under his 140-character limit. Succinct, but effective, we say. He took to Lucky's blog to again dispel any myths linking him to the anonymous account: "Consider this my first and last word on the subject, I am not @CondeElevator" he reiterated.
But now that leaves us at square one. Actually, square negative one -- as we have no possible perpetrators (though some think it's a Teen Vogue intern) but also sans a funny take on the inner-workings of staffers at Conde. We're sure that there is a whole social media FBI at Conde on the case -- god knows they have the money -- so once this destitute vagabond is discovered, we'll make sure to report on what sick form of punishment will be bestowed upon them: listings editor at TV Guide or features editor at OK! Or death....there's always that option.