Portfolio Won't Feel Like Homework, Says Editor Lipman

NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- On May 1, journalists will gather in New York for the annual National Magazine Awards ceremony. As always, editors will receive fancy statuettes to mark their achievements in general excellence, as well as for staples such as feature writing, photography and design.

I'm wondering if the publishing industry will someday remember this year's ceremony as its last gathering in the "B.P." age.

Before Portfolio, that is.

All-stars

The Conde Nast business magazine, which comes out Monday after a year-plus buildup, has assembled a collection of journalism all-stars.

The essential recruit was the editor in chief, Joanne Lipman, 45, who joined after a distinguished 22-year career at the Wall Street Journal (which, like MarketWatch, is published by Dow Jones & Co.).

By the time she left the Journal as a deputy managing editor, Lipman had served as the founding editor of Weekend Journal and presided over the creation of Personal Journal (both of which, it should be said, have continued to maintain standards of excellence in her wake). "I enjoy them thoroughly," she said.

Clearly Lipman embraces the challenge of a startup and knows how to make it work. The secret is "producing something that doesn't exist in the marketplace," she commented. "What constitutes a business story? I see business stories everywhere I look."

The benefit of being the new kid on the block, she stressed, is this: "We don't have to be bound by tradition."

Was that a poke at Time Inc.'s Fortune, which has been said to be Portfolio's chief competitor? No, Lipman insists.

"We're not comparing ourselves to anybody," she said. She underscored that Portfolio won't seem like a "homework" assignment.

Wooing

The publicity surrounding Portfolio has been so heavy that each hire became a story in its own right. When Portfolio wooed -- or poached, as some critics put it -- the likes of James Impoco from the New York Times or Amy Stevens from the Wall Street Journal or Matt Cooper from Time, media followers sizzled.

"It doesn't happen anywhere else!" Lipman marveled.

Conde Nast's willingness to invest substantially in Portfolio has been an underlying issue. Money is a big issue. You might say that Portfolio looms as a tale as potentially neurotic as, say, Alex Rodriguez's tenure with the New York Yankees. Rodriguez, in his fourth year in pinstripes, has posted statistics worthy of a future baseball hall of famer.

But the public's unreasonable expectations have made the player feel more like a failure than a success. A-Rod must suspect that he could swat 90 home runs in a season and critics still would carp that he fell short. Is it fair or logical? Nope. Is it inevitable? Of course.

Likewise, in the year ahead, Portfolio could sell a million ad pages and win 75 journalism prizes -- and these accomplishments wouldn't encourage the skeptics to declare the venture an unqualified success.

Just as the public resents Rodriguez because he is baseball's highest-paid player, much of the publishing industry happily twists a knife in Conde Nast's back because it is lavishing so much money on Portfolio (an estimated $100 million, covering the next few years).

Sniping

The critics have sniped at Portfolio for many reasons. When Laurie Cohen, who had come over from the Wall Street Journal, abruptly returned to her former employer, there were overblown headlines. Then there was the matter of secrecy.

Magazines traditionally guard their contents as devotedly as a mother bear watches over her cubs. But Portfolio has been mocked for engaging in top-level secrecy, bordering on paranoia.

Judging from the press accounts, you'd suspect that Portfolio was being hatched in Dick Cheney's bunker. "That was so bizarre," Lipman said.

The magazine has had its share of controversy. Portfolio's respected investigative reporer Kurt Eichenwald, a much publicized recruit from the New York Times, recently found himself engulfed in an ethics furor based largely on a story he had written for the Times in December 2005. (Eichenwald has denied that he committed an ethical breach. )

Rumors have been flying that Portfolio held a story Eichenwald has written.

Lipman said that she wouldn't comment on the magazine's contents. It was the only occasion during our interview when she seemed displeased with one of my questions, and the lone instance in which she didn't give me a direct answer.

"I don't think it was anything I was sensitive about," she told me days later.

Portfolio is anything but a sure thing. Manhattan Inc., a hip business magazine of the go-go 1980s, was much admired but didn't last too long. Likewise, Tina Brown's Talk was praised for its freshness before it folded. Time Inc.'s Life magazine has been put on the shelf -- again.

"There is a difference," according to Lipman. Conde Nast, a privately held company, "has a history of committing to magazines it believes in."

For now, Lipman and her staff prefer to think optimistic thoughts.

When I asked Lipman to compare her lives at the Journal and Portfolio, she launched into a spirited rehashing of how an editor can do quality journalism at either institution.

Realizing that this wasn't exactly the finely detailed, colorful answer I'd hoped for, she paused, and then brightened. Lipman offered an apt slice of life story.

Early on, Lipman decided to host a small reception for her new photography department. To her surprise, she learned that she could order Champagne from the Conde Nast cafeteria. By contrast, most newspaper journalists would settle for finding Hershey bars in their office vending machines.

"And," she beamed, "that was OK."

With any luck, as Portfolio reaches the world this week, Lipman and company will want to pop more corks.

MEDIA WEB QUESTION OF THE DAY: Are you impressed by what you see in Portfolio?

MONDAY REPORT CARD: Lots of journalists weighed in on Don Imus' firing last week. What he said was "the story." If he hadn't said those hideous words, in that awful tone, he'd still have a job.

THE READERS REPLY to my column about Imus: "You closed with this: 'Imus managed to offend African-Americans, women, Rutgers University, college students and athletes. (If I've inadvertently left anyone out, send me an e-mail for my edification.)' That's a lot of people, but you left out a great many. Millions of people belong to none of these groups, but are thoroughly offended and disgusted by the racist and sexist filth that Imus voices." Steve Marshall

(Media Web appears on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays.)

By Jon Friedman