I wonder if someone wanted to start a magazine called THAT Magazine, as an alternative to THIS magazine, (politically that is) if it would get funding from the ususal sources?

TOP 50, 'BUT' CLEARLY BY REVENUE ONLY.



As a magazine Art Director I'm always looking for new projects, but I find the opportunities in this country to be very poor. While more interesting magazines from other countries make it to our shelves (9 out of 10), Canadian magazines don't have a hope in hell on many fronts. Maybe it's because Canadians look elsewhere for inspiration. Maybe it's because newspapers in this country do nothing to bolster good looking, editorially interesting magazines either. Rarely are art directors or photographers mentioned for their accomplishments, even after the NMAF awards. Each time I am not working on a magazine (like now), I have intense fear that I'll never find a good one again. Kudos to those at Unlimited who certainly tried to change that: Gold for Best Art Direction in Canada last year, Best New Writer in Canada this year, Best New Magazine in Western Canada last year, Best Magazine in Alberta this year. But still not enough to sustain it (or me) in Canada.



Of the top 50 Canadian magazines listed in Masthead's Special Report, I find only a handful have all the editorial markings of great stories, challenging photography, strong art direction, and constantly provocative ideas. Most popular Canadian magazines are very lack-lustre and are simply followers. But you would think with total ad revue of almost half a billion dollars, that the prognosis would be far improved and much more exciting. Numbers do matter, so promote it like you believe it, stroke it like it's a work of art but not a bank account.



We expect and applaud progressive and inspiring ideas in design, television, advertising, book titles, fashion, art and film, so why not magazines? Why can't some of that half-a-billion in ad dollars go toward magazines that lead not follow? Mags that create not imitate? I worked with Moses Znaimer at the beginning of my career for 5 years, and now here sits a magazine that I think will get in the running soon – and this from a man who said the "the power of television will be it's victory over print." LOL. I'm paraphrasing but that was one of his Ten Commandments (look it up). I'm not saying I think Zoomer has all the right markings, and it's not for me, but Znaimer with Suzanne Boyd (and their team) are at least being 'creative' and taking the Canadian magazine world on in a very fast manner, in only one year four million dollars taken in. Not unlike the success of Tyler Brulé, also a Canadian. But he went outside Canada to launch his project. We have a list of well written magazines like The Walrus, but there is no reason in my mind why Canada could not create a Dwell, Raygun, Vanity Fair, Frieze, W,  Dazed, Wallpaper, Esquire, Interview, Nylon or any good-looking highly popular magazine the likes of which are countless from other countries.



Canada has broken through barriers with film, writing, comedy, design, art, television and architecture. Why not magazines? And which publisher in this fine land has the guts to go for it. Launch a really good-looking, really smart, 'popular' Canadian magazine sold nationwide. Saturday Night has been that many times, but SN lies dormant or dead. A metaphor? To answer the question, yes (the big) Canadian magazines are too conservative, are as dull as a subscription card, are not culturally inspiring but that comes from the top down, and the bottom of the ad pocket up. We don't need an occasional title that is revolutionary. We need to revolutionize the whole of this country's magazine industry before all that boomer money comes crashing down and kills it. I am bias and have worked on magazines (Shift, Outpost, enRoute, Adbusters and Unlimited) that I feel have carried many of these elements, but I don't think there are enough magazines in this country that put it out there, take chances and want to make a magazine worthy of our International rivals.



But if ever there was a time - with culture, business and politics churning, youth culture rampant, global economy shifting, and with the internet coming at magazines like a hungry lion - the time is clearly now to make a new model of a great, good-looking, editorially-exciting, creatively-charged, wisely-marketed, boldly-sold, large-format, Canadian magazine.



-malcolm brown mbrown@grafikmilk.com

Editors are by nature conservative. They are the pilots that must steer the ship carefully through the various pressures and interests that impact the course of their magazines. It's tiring, and making room for creativity is an extra effort that they put at the bottom of their to-do lists. But now, with our mags so small, we have some time and plenty of opportunity and reason to risk going outside of our self imposed boundaries. We have time (the books are so much smaller), and we have the need to differentiate out selves from our competition. Editors of Canada, go nuts!!

We need the old growth forest of publishing to burn down in order for new talent to come up. Most people can't stand younger people outshining them, so is this climate really a surprise?

I agree. We have no room for voice. Every issue has a test-kitchen proven format that hampers creativity and lulls the reader to sleep. That said, the September issue of The Walrus has great and funny piece on his his replacement by John Maclachlan Gray. You have to go digging for good material in the mags but the effort is worth it. As a voice-centred satirist, I'm finding lots of old markets have dried up for me as editors don't want to offend. It's time to strike a better balance between ad sales and editorial control. Also, writers (and I say this with all selfishness) need to be given more rope. Let us out to play. Don't dismiss an unusual pitch just because it doesn't fit the formula. Make room for new ideas in your magazine and the readers will love you for it.

Canadian media in general has become too conservative. We can thank political correctness for some of it, but we can also look to funding agencies, and the competition to please the caregivers (or shareholders, as the case may be). It should worry us that the 1960s and 1970s had more adventurous media.