It is the afternoon of February 4, 2004. David
Berlin has taken time out from deadline pressure at The Walrus'
Duncan Street offices in downtown Toronto to be a guest speaker
in a journalism class at Ryerson University. The editor of the
ambitious new Canadian general interest magazine - Canada's
answer to Harper's, he hopes - has a refreshing, off-the-wall
candour that captivates the students. He listens to their story
ideas and offers to let them sit in on a meeting at the office.
Just before the break, however, things get more
serious.
The students discuss one story from
each of the nascent magazine's three existing issues, including
Berlin's "Where Leaders Fail," based on a trip to the Middle East
in November. Provocatively, he tells them he's "internally
twisted" because he's angrier about the Middle East situation
than he appeared in writing, that he wanted to criticize the
Israeli position more forcefully.
Berlin says
a member of the board of directors that oversees The Walrus - a
board put in place by the non-profit Chawkers Foundation, which
funds the magazine - "strongly advised" him the piece better have
balance. The fear was that without it the magazine would lose
subscriptions. And now that he'd neutralized his position he felt
sick about it. It wasn't what he had observed and it wasn't what
he believed. Berlin's eyes well up and he's clearly upset. The
instructor signals that now might be a good time to go for a
break.
One week later, February 11, the
students who were so impressed by Berlin's performance the week
before are now stunned to read the e-mail flying around the
journalism community: Berlin resigns as editor, citing "health
reasons." After a blur of action and bravado - with the fourth
issue just put to bed - The Walrus's carpenter quietly tiptoes
offstage. But the question lingers: did the man Masthead editor
Bill Shields called a "compelling character" who "doesn't hold
back" lay down his tools - or was he told to put them down?
Health must certainly be an issue, as many
people notice how exhausted and haggard Berlin looks as he puts
the finishing touches on what turns out to be his final issue -
but it might be just one ingredient in a potent cocktail. The
cone of silence is thick, but it seems not everyone is pleased
with the editor's colourful performance. There are rumours of
chaos in the office - of a lack of focus and direction, of a
publisher assigning features, of a board interfering with
editorial and possibly even one board member actively seeking
change at the top.
o o o
One glance at Berlin's resume reveals a man who has had
many false starts. He studied and dropped out of medicine,
received his Masters in political science from York University
and attended the University of Chicago for his Ph.D., only to
leave without finishing his dissertation. He worked with his
father at Interlink Corp., the family business, in materials
handling and robotics. He ran as a New Democratic Party candidate
in the 2000 federal election, though he now insists he's a
centrist and has no party affiliation.
Berlin
first attempted to edit a magazine in 1998 after he and publisher
Denis Deneau bought the Literary Review of Canada. Previously its
mandate had been to review Canadian books and authors. "It was a
very serious magazine," Deneau says, "where academics were able
to discuss matters at length that they might not be able to in an
academic journal." But Berlin dreamed of turning the LRC into a
glossy general interest publication. During the initial
excitement, the tension between competing visions didn't surface,
but as time wore on the identity of the magazine became less
clear. "It was all over the place," says Helen Walsh, then part
owner and now publisher of the LRC. "The focus was on Canadian
books, but there was a lot more American stuff."
After nearly three years of argument, Berlin was bought
out. The decision was mutual, but his departure was messy and he
has not spoken to his former LRC colleagues since. In the
February 2002 issue of Masthead, he attacked his ex-colleagues in
a column, calling them a "vainglorious swat team." He wrote, "I
wanted our magazine to play a role in creating the huddle of
public intellectuals that this country so desperately needs." Now
he says, "At the LRC I wasn't able to move away from the academic
types - I couldn't do the forward thinking stuff I wanted to
do."
To do the forward thinking stuff Berlin
would have another fight on his hands - against the dismal legacy
of Canadian general interest magazines. Heavyweights like
publisher John Macfarlane and editor Robert Fulford were unable
to make Saturday Night a feasible financial venture in the 1980s
and 1990s. The magazine, which has folded and been resurrected
three times in its 116-year history, lost $750,000 in 1986 alone
under Fulford's charge. And Canadian Forum, the 84-year-old
left-wing title that first published writers such as Margaret
Atwood and Michael Ondaatje, suspended publication in 2000.
Publisher Jim Lorimer had relaunched the Forum only the year
before, but its meager monthly editorial budget of $5,000 wasn't
enough to keep it afloat. Similar attempts to create a venue for
great journalism and debate have died quickly. One of the most
notable, Gravitas, a national quarterly published out of Toronto
from 1994 to 1998 by Ian Mason, couldn't raise enough revenue to
stay in business.
Dismal legacy or no, by
spring 2002 Berlin was set on producing his glossy general
interest magazine. Reclining with his feet on the desk in his
Walrus office last fall, he remembered what got him there. "It
started off as a lark," he said. He emailed John R. (Rick)
MacArthur, Harper's publisher, complaining there were no Canadian
publications nurturing public discourse. He asked MacArthur to
consider a Harper's North and was surprised when he received an
invitation to discuss his plans with Lewis Lapham. A few weeks
later, Berlin and the Harper's editor smoked cigarettes and
blue-skied in Lapham's office. After the allotted hour, the
Harper's team provisionally agreed to do a split run with up to
40 pages of Canadian content. "Rick basically said he'd be
willing to spring for the printing," Berlin recalled, "but we'd
have to pay for our own staff, which is why I began looking for
funding."
Little did Berlin know that
Alexander, then senior producer of cbc's CounterSpin, had also
been pondering a magazine to tackle important issues. The pair
heard about each other's ideas through a mutual friend and
eventually met at a dinner party. Over supper, the two agreed
there was a need in Canada for an independent, smart magazine
that dealt not just with Canadian issues, but also world
concerns. Six weeks later, Berlin met with members of Alexander's
father's Chawkers Foundation, which agreed to provide $5 million
spread over five years and establish a board to oversee the
project. Alexander raised another $150,000 from the George Cedric
Metcalf Charitable Foundation for an internship
program.
By fall 2002, Berlin's search for
funding had given him enough money to produce 10 issues a year -
independent of Harper's support. But he asked Lapham to
contribute a long review of a Marshall McLuhan documentary to the
inaugural issue. Over the ensuing months, Berlin assembled a cast
of editorial talent, including former staffers from Saturday
Night and This magazine, and prepared to launch. One of the first
promises was that The Walrus, unlike similar magazines, would not
be a quaint collection of stories about Canada written by
Canadians. Instead, the mandate was to deliver a homegrown
perspective not only on domestic issues, but on international
matters as well.
Even before Berlin started
talking up The Walrus in the media, he was known for expressing
his thoughts uncensored, and knew how to draw criticism. "David
doesn't have a diplomatic bone in his body," says former federal
ndp leader Alexa McDonough, with a laugh.
In
January 2003, McDonough led a peace-seeking mission to the Middle
East. Berlin was included because of his connections. Although he
grew up in Canada, he was born in Israel, attended university
there and served in the army. But the trip turned controversial
when the Israeli embassy in Ottawa publicly criticized the
contingent. Spokesman Ronen Gil-Or claimed that when Berlin met
with the Israeli Defense Forces (idf), he compared them and what
they were doing in the Palestinian territories to what the Nazis
did against to Jews during World War II. He made reference to
Adolf Eichmann, the Nazi official who oversaw the deportation and
murder of millions. McDonough will only say the controversy was a
"shocking experience, riddled with inaccuracies. It wasn't the
focus of our mission and we weren't about to be thrown off by it.
For David, the mission was a very intense and painful
experience."
Berlin's own account of the incident
differs from what was reported. "I served in that army and I
asked them whether they sent their soldiers to courses to deal
with civilians," he says. He believed the idf put its soldiers in
danger by not properly training them and made his anger about the
situation known. He says he never made the Nazi comparison.
"That's bullshit, why would I do that?"
Although it's unclear what actually happened in Israel,
one thing is certain - Berlin has the ability to infuriate
people.
o o o
It's
October 1, 2003, one week after The Walrus hit the streets.
Berlin, publisher Ken Alexander and other staff members are set
to reprise the magazine's swank September 25 launch at the
Capitol Theatre in midtown Toronto. This time it's for an
exclusive gathering in Manhattan. The elite crowd - including
Canada's Consul General Pamela Wallin, Vanity Fair editor Graydon
Carter, and New Yorker writers Malcolm Gladwell and Adam Gopnik -
crowd into a posh Chelsea penthouse, north of the dark void where
the Twin Towers once stood. Guests drink giant martini glasses
filled with a specially prepared cocktail dubbed 'The Walrus.' To
celebrate the year's work, Berlin swallows eight cocktails in
three hours. When he makes his way to the front to give a short
speech, following Alexander and Wallin, he quips that they've
taken "all his good lines." Groping for a witty comment, he says,
"After two of these drinks, you start asking about the Twin
Towers - where are they?"
"When I heard it,
my heart sank," says Paul Wilson, then deputy editor and now
Berlin's replacement.
o o o
Now it's
late October and the first issue has been out a month. Berlin
looks haggard as he sits smoking at the bar of "Quotes" Bar
& Grill on King Street in Toronto. The hype has been
replaced by a real publication and there's no more blubber to
hide behind. Berlin knows it'll be a struggle living up to his
lofty claims, including the dubious promise to pay freelance
writers $2.50 per word. So far, the reaction has been mixed.
People are starting to wonder whether this former academic - with
only a disappointing tenure as editor of the lrc to show for his
magazine experience - can lead a Canadian general interest
magazine.
o o o
Now it's early November
and the second issue has been out a week. Alexander is sitting at
a Second Cup coffee shop just around the corner from the office,
contemplating what a Canadian perspective on international might
mean editorially. "We tend to be measured in our responses to
events, and we like to think matters through before leaping," he
says. "One might describe this as part of our 'compromising'
approach; I think of it as more considered." Alexander believes
Canadians need to weigh in on world issues now. "While there's
nothing wrong with reflecting Canada back to Canadians, such a
mandate is a bit parochial in our times. You need to put Canada
in the world of nations and engage the world."
Asked whether the impolitic Berlin is the right choice
to helm an international magazine, Alexander says, "It's not a
conservative choice, but then it's not a conservative magazine,
is it?"
o o o
Now
it's early December, two months after the New York gaffe. Berlin
shakes his head, exasperated that his blunder has been brought up
yet again. "My meaning was you have a few of these drinks and you
get a utopian feeling, like 9/11 never happened," he says. He
says the incident hadn't been entirely negative, as it had
promoted debate. "Part of what we're trying to create is a cadre
of public intellectuals - people who go out there and take risks
- and there's no insurance policy on that. The country needs a
lot more people like me, who are willing to make their
mistakes."
o o o
Like
the choice of cover story for the first issue. The 10,000-word
investigation into Paul Martin's Canada Steamship Lines business
empire, written by Canadian journalist Marci McDonald, was hardly
the topic to engage the rest of the world. London-based Tim
Rostron, formerly a consulting editor for The Walrus, admits,
"Paul Martin is an unknown in London and New York." Rostron
agrees that for The Walrus to get through to the rest of the
world, non-Canadians need to be engaged. Then why Martin? "It was
argued that it was an archetypal story about wealth and power,"
he says.
Robert Fulford, who critiqued the
first issue in one of his National Post columns, believes there
has to be a connection between the reader and the subject. "If
you're going to publish to the world," he says, "you have to
write about the world." But he also thinks The Walrus's strength
will be its Canadian stories. "Why should I pick The Walrus up
instead of The Atlantic or Harper's? Because it will say
something about Canada." Fulford thought it would be hard for
Berlin to carve out The Walrus's perspective until he had
published several issues. "You have to grope towards these things
in public," he says. After the third issue, Fulford is more
reserved: "I'm disappointed in what I've seen since the original
issue. It's slipped a bit and become a little more
self-important."
While Berlin groped in
public, another very real challenge loomed - to ensure the
magazine's survival after five years, when Chawkers's $5 million
runs out. While traditionally only 30 per cent of a magazine's
revenue derives from subscriptions, The Walrus needs to rely more
heavily on that source and less on advertising.
Initially, readers bought in. Last summer, a direct mail
campaign targeting 60,000 households netted over 6,000 paid
subscriptions - a 10 per cent response rate, far better than the
industry average of between one and three per cent. After its
third issue, The Walrus had 30,000 paid subscriptions, according
to consultant Greg Keilty. A Print Measurement Bureau number
won't be available until next year, but it's an encouraging
start.
Instant acceptance hasn't been so easy
to win from advertisers. Except for Roots, companies were wary
about buying space in the first issue. The second issue fared
marginally better, with new clients Audi and Porsche. Both issues
contained only 16 pages of ads, but Marty Tully, advertising
sales agent for The Walrus, isn't concerned. "Advertisers get
it," he says, "they understand what we're trying to do." But
industry expert Lynn Cunningham is skeptical. She wonders if
major advertisers are paying the full advertiser's rate - or
anything at all. "It's not an uncommon practice for new magazines
to give free or discounted ads to create the right environment,"
she says.
Sixteen per cent is well below
Alexander's target of a 30 to 70 advertising to editorial ratio.
In terms of attracting advertising revenue, the general interest
category has declined in popularity. Today, magazines need a
clearly defined audience. According to Fraser Sutherland, author
of The Monthly Epic: A History of Canadian Magazines, there has
been a trend toward narrowcasting since the late 1980s.
"Advertisers want to get the best bang for their buck," he says,
"and can sell products better by specializing, instead of
painting the whole media scene with products."
And
now Berlin, whose specialty was painting the media scene with
colouful controversy, has left. "It was refreshing," says
Masthead editor Shields. "Many editors are so careful not to say
the wrong thing - David Berlin went out of his way to
provoke."
Two days after the announcement,
Berlin doesn't elaborate on "health reasons," but says his doctor
warned him he "couldn't live under these conditions." He doesn't
feel great about it and ideally would have stayed on a couple
more years. "I was the guy with the vision," he continues,
defiantly. "It was my idea and I'll still have to stand on top of
it."
Tim Rostron is more reserved. The former
consulting editor, who said putting Martin on the first cover was
a mistake, offers, "I think it's best if I hold my fire regarding
editorial meetings." Off the record, one contributor says Berlin
didn't have the vast editing experience required to run a
magazine like The Walrus, nor did he have the ability to
delegate: "When the stakes are this high you can't afford to dick
around." Another source says it sometimes seemed as if the
publisher wanted to be editor and the editor wanted to be
publisher. There were even rumours that Alexander assigned
stories, although he denies this.
New
editor Paul Wilson, who says he's happy to continue editing
Berlin's features, confirms there was some confusion in the
office. "In the enthusiasm for the project, everyone got mixed
up. You can't run a magazine when the lines of authority are
blurred," he says. "It was a big collective, but I don't want to
get too far into that. The division between church and state will
be strictly observed now. The two of us are co-operating to make
sure both sides are talking. Ken is new at the publishing game,
but he's worked his ass off to learn it."
But
Berlin may have endured interference from more than the
publisher. One board member, according to a source, was "actively
trying to oust" him because of a perceived lack of focus and
editorial direction - criticisms that also surfaced at the LRC.
Wilson denies this flat out, saying, "The board never played a
role in the editorial side." Chair Jack Shapiro says board
members are "outspoken people," but the allegation should be
taken "with a grain of salt."
Putting a brave
face on the shake-up at the top, Alexander says, "The magazine is
going great guns and we're in terrific shape!" As The Walrus
travels the bumpy road toward commercial viability, one question
remains: how will it challenge readers and stir up the public
without its insouciantly confrontational leader who, once again
in his peripatetic career, has moved on? Until the sudden exit,
it might have been possible to believe that, at age 52, David
Berlin had finally found his vocation - as editor of The Walrus
magazine. Not any more.
"You were always
wondering," says Martha MacLachlan, his campaign manager from the
2000 election, "how the hell did David get
there?"