No matter where your media interests lie, it’s probably safe to assume that at one time or another, Merrill Brown has had your dream job. Reporter at a big-name paper? Check. (He covered
finance for the Washington Post.) Magazine editor-in-chief? Of course.
(He was nominated for a National Magazine Award when helming Channels.)
TV executive? You bet. (He was one of the original founders of CourtTV.)
Publishing strategist? Sure thing. (He was a consulting editor at both
Money and Time, as well as several other media companies, and now
runs his own consulting firm.) New media visionary? Been there, doing that. (He
was the founding editor of MSNBC.com, the launch director for DesktopVideo,
and is the chairman of Now Public, a Vancouver-based Web company that could
change the face of news reporting. “It wants to be the premium acquirer and
distributor of citizen journalism around the world,” he says).

So is there a method to Brown’s resumé madness? “My career switches are more
based on exciting opportunities that were presented than on some clearly well-developed plan,” he says.

Brown’s also looking toward journalism’s future by helping to train
tomorrow’s reporting superstars. He’s editorial director of News21, a news
initiative sponsored by the Carnegie Corporation and the Knight Foundation. In
that role he ensures that student journalists from five journalism programs —
Columbia, Northwestern, Berkeley, USC, and Harvard — have the tools they need
to produce investigative content on issues relevant to American democracy in
principle and application.

---

Position: National editorial director of News21; Chairman of
NowPublic.com; founder and principal of his own consulting business, MMB Media
LLC
Education: BA in political science from Washington University, St.
Louis, 1974
Hometown: Born in Philadelphia, grew up in Silver Spring
Maryland
First full time job: Newspaper reporter at the Winston Salem
NC Sentinel
Resume: Senior vice president of RealNetworks; founding
editor-in-chief of MSNBC.com; SVP of Court TV
Marital status:
Married
What’s your favorite TV show: Curb Your
Enthusiasm
Last book read: The Greatest Story Ever Sold, by
Frank Rich
Most interesting media story right now: The accelerating
decline of the American newspaper
Guilty pleasure: New York
restaurants
First section you read in your Sunday paper: “The reality
of reading the Sunday paper is that it begins on Saturday with the inserts, so I
guess Arts and Leisure.”

---

You’ve moved back and forth between reporting and publishing — you were a
finance reporter for the Washington Post, then the director of business
development for the Washington Post Co., and then went on to being the
editor-in-chief of Channels. Why and how did you make the switch back to
editorial?
I’ve gone back and forth as interesting opportunities
presented themselves, because I’m passionate about both media products and the
business components that make them successful. The other part of it is I
consciously decided that I wanted to leave the business of daily reporting
because I wanted to be more of a participant in making things happen than acting
as just an observer. I wanted to be one of the people pushing the boulder up the
cliff and solving hard problems, rather than observing other people doing so and
reporting on it in journalism.

You helped create Court TV.
How did that network come about, and what was your role in creating
it?
In the late 80s, I was quite exited about the opportunity to develop
new things in cable TV because the industry was booming. I wanted to be part of
the early stages of an exciting cable opportunity. I got to know, socially, the
guy whose idea it was, Steve Brill. He called me with the idea and said, “What
you do think?” It sounded like a great idea, and I went off to do it. I had
covered antitrust litigation as a business reporter, and I was comfortable in a
courtroom, even if I didn’t have any real legal training.

You seem to be involved in almost all aspects of media — from Web sites
to magazines to newspapers to television. Which medium is doing the best job
evolving?
That’s pretty easy. The Internet was a blank screen in the mid-90s, now it’s evolved in a short period of time to a very specialized delivery
mechanism for news, and it’s the best delivery platform for news that’s ever
been invented.

But has it found a way to make money?
The New York Times
continues to report rising and significant amounts of revenue on their digital
operations. The MSNBC and CNN sites are significantly profitable; evaluating the
profitability of a lot of newspaper Web sites is hard. When you see the revenue
of the Philadelphia Inquirer or the Boston Globe‘s site, you see
their revenue number and the cost of operations of the Web site, but you don’t
see the payroll that involves hundreds of journalists who write the
content. But the biggest standalone kind of news sites are showing good revenue
growth and margin. Internet news is making significant amounts of money in many
places.

Do you think your career path is an anomaly, or do you think future media
players are going to have to do it all — whether it’s editorial, programming or
business development?
I don’t hold myself up as an example of anything in
particular. However, in helping journalism schools develop curriculum, I’ve
realized that it’s important that journalists think of themselves not just as
people creating content but as entrepreneurs. In the brave new world, the
opportunity to start things and create business models exists for journalists.
People in journalism need to have serious knowledge about how the business works
and what the entrepreneurial opportunities are that the business presents. It’s
really important for today’s future journalists and young journalists to
understand.

Where has your diverse background better served you: does your business
knowledge better help your journalism skills, or does your journalism background
make you a more creative businessman?
I guess my journalism skills have
made me a fast study and have given me the ability to understand the art of
analyzing challenging issues in a very helpful way. On the flip side, in helping
develop MSNBC.com as editor-in-chief, the fact that I could assess the business
opportunities of starting from scratch on the Web was enormously helpful in
making MSNBC.com successful.

I don’t think it’s inappropriate for ad sales people and editors and reporters to intermingle, as long as they know where the lines are. One of the failures of media today is the way “church and state” is implemented.

Is there danger in crossing over from business to editorial and back
again? Did you ever feel undue influence from one sector over the other, or that
your loyalties to either the news or the bottom line were affect your ability to
do your job?
No, because job definitions are just that, and when you play
one role, your commitment is to precisely that role. Although when you’re the
EIC of a media property these days, especially on the Web, you need to both
influence the business process and figure out how to adapt to the changing
nature of the newsroom in ways that didn’t exist in the past. I don’t believe in
the traditional interpretation of what church and state means. I don’t think
it’s inappropriate for ad sales people and editors and reporters to
intermingle, as long as they know where the lines are. I think one of the
failures of media today is the way “church and state” is implemented. Journalists
with good ideas and sales staff with good ideas should be able to collaborate in
a creative process. I’m for a complete breakdown of what church and state means,
as long as ethics remain. I’ve walked that line, and I’d like to think that I
haven’t crossed it. Editors need to understand the right place to draw that
line, especially in the current environment.

You were the first editor-in-chief at MSNBC.com. What was the site like
then? Was it a very planned out, focused-group effort, or like the Wild,
Wild West?
Much closer to Wild, Wild West. We did research about users’
interests and how they were using the site and so forth, but the challenge of
getting pictures and words on an Internet page in 1996 was not insignificant.
The mere act of publishing had challenges in itself. Think about how easy it is
to start a blog today compared to what it took to start a Web page in 1996. One
of the challenges was to create work that took advantage of the capacity of the
Internet as a medium. It was really important to turn stories around as quickly
as possible — to be really good at breaking news. So if you hear something
happen, you come to the Web site and get the story, and your experience is
satisfying. Something happens in Congress, a plane goes down, war breaks out —
it was with those situations as a premise, creating materials for the medium was
important, and with those premises we set off.

Back then, mainstream media thought that Internet news was trivial, and
thought it was a passing fancy and would never be a major competitive platform.
Lots of friends couldn’t believe I moved my life from New York to engage in this
odd thing of delivering news to a machine on a desk. The public was curious but
not engaged. We had real small number of people in 1995 and ’96 using the stuff,
but there was already a community of early adopters into it, and their
communications with us helped the whole category develop.

In your career, you’ve done a lot of consulting. Is there a common problem
in media environments that arises from the same team working together for too
long, and which can be easily solved with a fresh pair of eyes?
The print
business in general has moved way too slowly to embrace and implement the
cultural change that the digital era requires. Only now with profit and loss
issues so dramatic are they waking up to the reality of the changes that are
required. Across a lot of my work, one of the things they talk to me about, and
I try to help them with, is how you can rapidly change the old culture of print
and turn it into more of a digital environment. People have a lot at stake; it’s
hard, but the process of doing it is accelerating and managements need to do it
more aggressively and add more resources to it.

Why are they so slow in embracing it? Is it a sense of superiority, that
print and old media is better than print? Or just unfamiliarity with the
medium?
There are a number of issues: one is the fact that for lots of
media companies, the bulk of revenue produced comes from print and that needs to
be protected and developed and not ignored. This is issue number one — the
traditional media business remains very large and can’t be ignored. Number two
is that there are still many executives and editorial people in key positions
who are not yet comfortable with new technology. There are executives who rarely
look at video online, and who certainly don’t have a strong engagement with Web
2.0 issues, like social networks, and who still see the Internet function as
being about distributing conventional programming rather than developing new
content. If you go to any number of newspaper and magazine Web sites for large
publications around the country, basically what you get is re-edited and
republished work from another platform put on the Web. That is totally wrong.

How did you come to work for News21?
I developed a project with the
Carnegie Corporation of New York to do a research paper on young people and how
they use the news. So I started working with them to develop that paper, which
got a lot of attention when it was completed. In engaging with Carnegie and in
the context of my relationship with them, I learned they were part of developing
this initiative with a bunch of journalism schools, and they asked me to sit in
on some meetings and participate in thinking about the initiative. When it
finally came together, I had a relationship with them, had been an adviser, and
had been networking for both the Carnegie and Knight Foundations. The initiative
came along, and the opportunity to run the program was part of the grant, and
they asked me to help put it together, and I was happy to. It was a natural
extension of the work I’d been doing.

My role is to help the universities and the faculty and the fellows to set up
a summer program — we have four newsrooms that allow the fellows to create
important stories around a given topic. The program starts with a course in the
spring or winter semester on the topic of the summer program. Students then go
out and report for ten weeks over the summer and with a goal of creating high
caliber content about those topics. I make sure that they get what they need to
create those newsrooms and the accompanying Web sites — the appropriation of
resources like cameras and Web application software. I do what I can to help
pull that together.

Obviously, the students get a lot out of the experience, but what do they
bring to the project that more seasoned journalists don’t have?
They
bring a sense of what digital media can do to improve storytelling that
certainly many of their older colleagues don’t have, because digital tools —
whether it’s flash or Internet video or animated applications — a lot of that
is second nature to many journalism grad students. They understand the world of
the Web, and have a somewhat different approach to conventional storytelling.
They see the world through a completely different perspective. That’s really
helpful in seeing and creating stories that work across multiple platforms.

What are some of the projects that have come out of News21 that have
impressed you?
Last year, the first summer, the project was on liberty
and security, the tension between the traditional American view of civil
liberties and the need for national security. We broke it down into topics and
products. We developed a deep relationship with the Associated Press, got seven
or eight stories on the AP A wire, one of which won awards and got lots of
attention. It was about the education department improperly going through
college funding reports and taking out data about students. When we revealed the
program, they discontinued it.

We did great investigative reporting, doing work about topics like that, or
like how outsourcing worked in military intelligence. I mean, really terrific
investigative stories that got a lot of attention. We did an hour-long
documentary for CNN on the lives of U.S. military men and women abroad. They
reported on immigration in Southern California, what immigration is like there,
the drama and the challenges people face. We had stories in many major
publications and TV shows — we did a series of stories on immigration on
California public television. We broke stories. It was precisely the kind of
media opportunity we were trying to create for them, and we hope to repeat that
success this summer.

Many journalists struggle with going back to school and learning
journalism versus just jumping in the mix, pitching and writing and reporting.
What benefits to journalists come from a formal education in
journalism?
The benefits of journalism grad school include access to the
best teaching they could possibly have. Journalism organizations are rarely
known for their ability to mentor people. Students are getting training from
world-class experts. There’s also value in allowing journalists to expand the
nature of their skills, and expand the level of those skills, whether it’s in TV
production or writing or new media. Journalism school can also give students
exposure to lots of different media opportunities. They get to engage in these
opportunities and mediums while they’re in school, which is valuable in shaping
career decisions. World-class teaching, skill development, and exposure to media
— all of this can do a world of good for the right kind of students in
journalism school.

Traditional media is at risk in part because younger people don’t consume
news the same way their parents did. How is the media industry going to have to
change as a result — and will the face of the media industry change when it’s
Yahoo and Google who provide people with most of their information?
There
is no evidence that Yahoo and Google are going to be major original sources of
news content. They remain distinct vehicles for the work of mainstream media
organizations. No matter how many people go to Yahoo and Google for their news,
their work is going to come from someone else. Yahoo News has a few dozen people
on staff, and most are in producer roles, not fact gatherers. Readers still
depend on wires and newspapers and TV networks for content, and that’s why it’s
so important that the business models evolve quickly. They remain the principle
source for what people read every day. The blogosphere is healthy and getting
healthier, and citizen journalism, like the site I’m involved in, Now Public, is really taking
off. But the news that we get from sites like Google and Yahoo comes from old
line, organized, mainstream media organizations, and that’s not going to change.

In addition to Now Public, you’re also an adviser to BackFence, which is a
Web-based, community journalism project. Leasing out news coverage to citizen
journalists is almost the opposite of the work being done at News21, where
students are given very specific training and guidance. Can both models
co-exist?
It’s critical that the two coexist and work as collaborative
enterprises. In order to make the newspaper model work, newspapers have to,
because of their declining resource base, use citizens to help cover large
metropolitan areas and communities. Around the world, Now Public has 90,000
registered contributors in 150 countries. NowPublic has the opportunity to fill
some of the void left by some of the major media organizations who are feeling
like they have to close down bureaus around the world. Now Public can be eyes
and ears in lots of places around the world not covered.

Figuring out how to make the old and new work together is critically
important, so I’m excited about Now Public. Now Public is a great opportunity
and a great enterprise. Now Public takes material in real time, whether it’s
from a camera phone or notepad or digital camera or computer and brings it into
public consciousness in ways conventional media isn’t and can’t. In the
presentation we just gave to investors recently, we showed pictures from
Heathrow Airport when Heathrow was closed after the liquid scare. The airport
was closed off, and media couldn’t get in, but we had pictures from citizen
journalists who could get there when the media couldn’t.

All of that needs to be put into a journalism and news content that makes
sense for those of us surrounded by a cacophony of stuff, and we now have a
public forum that is going to make that happen. It’s very important that the
journalism community get this right.

Before editor Daniel Peres was summoned to Details from Paris (he was Fairchild’s European bureau chief), the magazine had gone through five editors in 10 years, failed numerous relaunches, and carried a voice that seemed to change with every issue. Critics were many. Seven years later, Peres is still at Details, having solidified the masthead and aligned the magazine’s style sensibilities with his own. But, like every print magazine editor, Peres is faced with a tumultuous landscape and traversing the “Wild West” mentality of the Internet, while maintaining his own sanity.

Name: Daniel Peres
Position: Editor, Details
Birthdate: October 14, 1971
Hometown: Baltimore
Education: B.A., NYU, double major, Journalism and History
Marital status: Married actress Sarah Wynter in 2005
Favorite television show: Real Desperate Housewives of Orange County — “It’s spectacular, you have to check it out. It’s amazing how regular people allow cameras into their lives thinking they’ll become famous.”
Last book read: Yiddish Policeman’s Union, Michael Chabon
Last song heard on your iPod: “More Than A Feeling,” Boston
Guilty pleasure: Also Real Desperate Housewives of Orange County
First section of the Sunday Times: Styles

---

What is the most interesting media news story out there right now?
New York magazine’s piece on Time magazine was very well done. As a magazine editor, I think we’re all looking at what is going on at Time with great interest. That story has gotten, frankly, very interesting — the competition between newsweeklies. Terrifically interesting story to watch.

What’s a typical day for you?
I’m up at 7:00AM. I catch the beginning of the Today show. Outside my apartment door are copies of The New York Times, New York Post and Women’s Wear Daily. I do a quick scan of the papers, then, at 8:00AM, I begin breakfast meetings in lieu of the “business lunch,” which I try to avoid at all costs. When you do [business lunches] you end up being out of the office for two hours, minimum, and so many people are depending on me for projects to move forward I can’t afford it.

In my office waiting for me are the Washington Post, L.A. Times, Wall Street Journal, Variety, and USA Today. I scan those papers. Then, in the office, the day is anything but typical. It’s a series of meetings with my staff — it could be talking about upcoming covers, story ideas, fashion coverage — it’s like a revolving door of various departments. My homepage is a newsmap that updates every 5-10 minutes. Right now, I’m reading about Halliburton. I tend not to look at the popular media blogs (Gawker, Jossip, Fishbowl) unless someone tells me to.

How would you characterize the state of the industry?
It’s a bit tenuous. The close of Premiere recently, the third or fourth magazine to fold. It’s certainly not seeing a boom. But, on the whole, I actually think it’s healthy. I take issue with people who say the print medium is an endangered species. Technology means you have to adapt to the times, get stronger. I’m not a fatalist. Smart editors need to react and adapt to the online space.

I’m editing a magazine for men like me, with my interests. I know what my interests are. And, if I can do that online, we’ll draw more readers to it.

What’s the toughest thing about being a magazine editor in 2007?
It’s no secret that the magazine industry is going through a tremendous period of change, and a number of big magazines have folded.

Do you feel added pressure?
That added pressure is met with excitement. I think I have a tremendous advantage in that I’m editing a magazine for men like me, with my interests. I know what my interests are. And, if I can do that online, we’ll draw more readers to it. So, I’m embracing the challenge with excitement and enthusiasm.

What is Details doing online?
Details and GQ — our homepages have been at men.style.com. It’s what people in the company call a “destination” site. But, we’re rethinking that. I had to reconfigure my masthead, and now two people are solely dedicated to the Web. And, they are constantly online, thinking about the Web. In 2008, we’re going to be breaking away from men.style.com, and we’ll be standalone sites.

For years, people have referred to Details as a magazine for gay men. How do you respond to that?
I think it’s something that lives in the press, the media. It’s not something our readers dwell on. My job is to create a great magazine that appeals to our audience — straight men, gay men, everybody. Like I said, I’m editing a magazine for men like me, with my interests. To be honest, I don’t think about it much, except when the media — like you — asks.

In the past you’ve had — at least superficially — an adversarial relationship with Maer Roshan. So, what do you think of the new Radar?
We tweak each other, but [we’ve become] great friends. I think Radar looks good, and I think Maer is incredibly smart, even stubbornly so. And, he’s gotten a tremendous amount of press and created this buzz around his launches. He’s better at PR than most of the PR people I know. I know if I were ever to have a fall from grace in the press, the first person I’d call for advice would be Maer.

What’s next for you?
You know, I’m incredibly happy creating this magazine. I’d never say never, but right now, I feel great about my job, and am excited about the future here.

[Dylan Stableford is mediabistro.com’s managing editor, media news. He can be reached at dylan AT mediabistro DOT com.]

[NOTE: This interview contains excerpts, and has been edited for clarity.]

Leading up to the May 1, 2007 National Magazine Awards, mediabistro.com is publishing a special package of our popular interview series, “So What Do You Do?,” with daily interviews of selected nominees, ranging from well-known to obscure. Today, we chat with newly re-elected ASME president and Glamour editor-in-chief Cindi Leive.

See our other interviews with Ellie 2007 nominees:
Adam Moss, Editor, New York; Joyce Rutter Kaye, Editor, Print; David Granger, Editor, Esquire?; Moisés Naím, Editor, Foreign Policy; Jay Stowe, Editor, Cincinnati; Ted Genoways, Editor, Virginia Quarterly Review; Mark Strauss, Editor, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

---

Name: Cindi Leive
Position: Editor, Glamour
Resumé: Editor of Self from ’99 to ’01 prior to coming to Glamour
Birthdate: Jan 21, 1967
Hometown: McLean, Virginia
Education: Swarthmore College
Marital status: Married to film producer Howard Bernstein
First section of the Sunday Times: The magazine
Favorite television show: 30 Rock
Guilty pleasure: American Idol. Go, Jordin!
Last book read: Fish: The Basics, by Shirley King. I was looking for a recipe. Before that, Lawrence Wright’s Looming Tower.
2007 Nominations: Two (Personal Service and General Excellence)

---

The last time Glamour won an Ellie was for General Excellence in 2005. As editor-in-chief, what was that experience like, and how is being nominated this year different so far, if at all?
That experience was completely surreal, because it was the first time
Glamour had been nominated for any Ellie in almost a decade. Also, I was
about 10 months pregnant and not expecting to be up on stage. To be
nominated again is an enormous thrill. I’m incredibly proud of our staff.

What do you think of your chances for Glamour‘s two Ellie
nominations this year? How does being recognized in these categories reflect Glamour‘s objectives as a magazine, and your goals as its editor?

Well, our chances are obviously slim because it’s a pretty stellar roster of nominees. But, I love that we’re nominated for being excellent and personal — it sums up the combination we’re going for every month.

You’ve been president of ASME for almost a year now. What have you been trying to accomplish in that capacity, and what has that role afforded you the opportunity to do that other editors may not have a crack at doing/ trying?

Working with ASME has been an honor. This is a time of intense change for
our industry, so our focus has been on positioning ASME to respond to
that — from recognizing online journalism at the National Magazine Awards, to
creating updated new ASME guidelines for digital media. I do think ASME has
a unique role to play right now, because editors more than ever want to
learn from one another. Everyone I know is asking each other, “What’s working for you?”

What challenges do you face as ASME president? How does your ASME position intersect your role with Glamour?

I¹m lucky that once a month, at our board meetings, I get to learn from my
most accomplished peers. I feel like I walk out of the room a better editor
every time.

You actually began your magazine career at Glamour as an editorial assistant. When did you know you wanted to become an editor-in-chief? How did your move to Self as editor-in-chief fit into your progression towards your role at Glamour today, and what does it mean to you to be back where you started?
Self was a blast to edit. And, I was never as in shape in my life as when I
worked there! But, Glamour‘s my dream job. I think young women are just about
the most interesting audience you can edit for, and I love that we can find
the Glamour angle — of empowering women — in basically any story, from beauty
trends to the Don Imus thing.

---

“Magazines are some of the strongest brand names in the country, and people trust us. A lot of industries would kill to be able to say that.”

---

Take us through a typical day in your life. (Please be specific as you can — “Wake up @ 8:30, watch the Today show,” etc….)
I get up really early to run. I’m not naturally a morning person, but it’s
the only time I can find to exercise. Then, I read the news online, do the
headless-chicken routine of getting my kids up and dressed, go to work, and
spend the day with my staff. Editing happens
mostly at night, at home — I don’t like closing my door to edit during the day. I always feel like I’m missing something!

How do you feel about the state of the industry, and what are the greatest challenges it faces?
The explosion of digital media and the need for magazines to expand beyond
pure print are the big issues, of course, but I believe many magazine
companies will come out of this period more successful than ever. Magazines
are some of the strongest brand names in the country, and people trust us. A
lot of industries would kill to be able to say that.

What steps are you and the Glamour staff taking to adjust to the current media landscape and the growing role of the Web? How are you guiding ASME through the challenges posed by online media?
At Glamour, we’ve rejiggered our staff and reassigned positions to the Web
and other multimedia projects. At ASME, we’re launching programs to help
editors figure out how to do 12 jobs at once without ever neglecting what is
still usually the mothership — the print magazine.

What will you be wearing to the Ellies?
God only knows… ask me Tuesday morning!

---

[Rebecca L. Fox is mediabistro.com’s managing editor, service and features. She can be reached at rebecca AT mediabistro DOT com. Emily Million is a freelance writer in New York City.]

Leading up to the May 1, 2007 National Magazine Awards, mediabistro.com is publishing a special package of our popular interview series, “So What Do You Do?,” with daily interviews of selected nominees, ranging from well-known to obscure. Today, we chat with newly-elected ASME secretary and New York editor-in-chief Adam Moss

See our other interviews with Ellie 2007 nominees:
Cindi Leive, Editor, Glamour; Joyce Rutter Kaye, Editor, Print; David Granger, Editor, Esquire?; Moisés Naím, Editor, Foreign Policy; Jay Stowe, Editor, Cincinnati; Ted Genoways, Editor, Virginia Quarterly Review; Mark Strauss, Editor, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

---

Name: Adam Moss
Position: Editor, New York
Resumé: Esquire/7Days/The New York Times Magazine/New York
Birthdate: Almost exactly one half-century ago
Hometown: New York
Education: Oberlin College, B.A.
Marital status: Single, legally speaking. But more or less married.
First section of the Sunday Times: Front page
Favorite television show: Friday Night Lights, plus the usual HBO stuff
Guilty pleasure: I feel guilty about all my pleasures. I’m Jewish.
Last book read: The Yiddish Policeman’s Union
2007 nominations: Seven (General Excellence, Public Interest, Profile Writing, Magazine Section, Design, Interactive Service, Interactive Feature)

---

You have the most nominations of any magazine this year. How does it
feel?

Well, it would feel wonderful if that were true. It still feels pretty
wonderful that we were tied for second with Esquire. The most went to
… The New Yorker. Which, I guess, leads to your next question.

Do you ever say to yourself, “Eat it, David Remnick”?

Um no. Do you?

Speaking of, what is your relationship like with The New Yorker. Do
you
feel you compete with them directly? Is it like the Mets-Yankees?

My relationship to The New Yorker is mostly one of a very satisfied
subscriber. It’s a great magazine. But, we hardly compete with them at
all. They’re pretty much about New York in name only. But I’m sure we
would whup them in an interleague game.

What do you think of your Ellies chances?

I can’t even guess. I’m just happy that ASME recognized us pretty much
across the board. For general excellence, which for starters honors the
whole staff. But, also public interest, and profile writing, and
magazine section, and design and two of the three Web categories.
Everybody here can feel pretty good about how we did, and I think
everybody does. We try to do a lot of things around here, and I’m just
glad our peers don’t feel we’re screwing too many of them up.

---

“In deference to Anna Wintour, I’m trying not to say ‘blog.'”

---

What’s the biggest challenge of your job as an editor?

Focus. Thinking beyond the next issue or even the next day. On a
weekly, everything comes at you pretty fast.

Take us through a typical day in the life as New York‘s editor. (be
specific if you can — “Wake up @ 8:30, watch the Today show,” etc….)

I wake up a lot earlier than that (7am? 6:30am? I don’t do that on
purpose, I just can’t sleep like I used to), grab a a cup of coffee and
read everything I can (on paper and online) as quickly as I can. I go to
work around 9:30am. I sit in a lot of meetings. I make everyone else sit
in lots of meetings, for which they resent me. Then, I go home around 8pm
or so most days (11pm on closing nights; 6pm or so on Fridays). Everything
between that is a blur. But, the issues seem to come out.

How do you feel about the state of the industry?

It’s obviously a complicated time, as most of us have to learn to be
bilingual in print and the Web, at least. The advertising industry,
which pays most of our bills, is especially enamored of the Web these
days, which means we’d be foolish not to spend more and more of our time
trying to do what we do in an online form. But, of course, the Web is a
much different medium.

That’s what’s interesting to me about working in
this business at this moment — the opportunity to take the things
magazines have always done, like telling stories and delivering smartly
filtered information, and translating that to a medium with moving
pictures and sound, instant response, sophisticated sorting tools, and a
totally different relationship with the reader, who has almost as much
control over your site as you do. I’m not saying anything new here.

But,
I’m especially loving how primitive and even forgiving the Web still is.
You can try anything, and if it doesn’t work, you just take it down and
try something else (you just have to avoid a mocking comment or two on
someone else’s site). Among other things, the Web part of this job is
really fun. And, all of this is not to say that I think print is going
away. What print magazines are for will change, but if each arena is
managed correctly and differently, print and the Web can both thrive.

A lot of magazines are currently trying to figure out the Web. You
guys
were nominated for a Web-only award. Do you feel you are any closer to
“figuring it out”?

God, no. Whatever anyone figures out on the Web has to be figured out all
over again every six months.

What’s the next step for New York? What’s the next step for you
personally?

We’ve just launched something called Vulture on our site, which is a
daily entertainment micro-magazine (in deference to Anna Wintour, I’m
trying not to say blog). Also, a daily entertainment newsletter called
Agenda, tailored to different tastes (populist, indie, etc.) You should
check them out. And, we have a whole mess more to launch online as fast
as we can turn it out. We’re tinkering with a few new standing features
for the magazine, and then next year is our 40th anniversary, which we
plan to exploit in as shameless a manner as every other magazine. Then,
we have an issue a week to put out. The next step for me, personally, is
to go home and take a nap.

Finally, what will you be wearing to the Ellies?

Whatever still fits. Which most definitely limits my options.

---

[Dylan Stableford is mediabistro.com’s managing editor, media news. He can be reached at dylan AT mediabistro DOT com.]

Leading up to the May 1 2007 National Magazine Awards, mediabistro.com is publishing a special package of our popular interview series, “So What Do You Do?,” with daily interviews of selected nominees, ranging from well-known to obscure. Today we chat with Mark Strauss, editor of possibly the year’s most obscure nominee, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

See our other interviews with Ellie 2007 nominees:
Joyce Rutter Kaye, Editor, Print; David Granger, Editor, Esquire?; Moisés Naím, Editor, Foreign Policy; Jay Stowe, Editor, Cincinnati; Ted Genoways, Editor, Virginia Quarterly Review;

---

Name: Mark Strauss
Position: Editor, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
Resumé: Before becoming editor of the Bulletin in 2005, Strauss was a senior editor at Foreign Policy magazine. Before that, Strauss was a researcher at the Brookings Institution, a reporter at Discover magazine and an editorial intern at SPY magazine. He has written articles for Slate, New Republic, Washington Monthly and the Washington Post.
Birthdate: November 8, 1966
Hometown: Ridgewood, NJ
Education: B.A., Macalester College; M.S., Columbia School of Journalism; M.A., School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University
Marital status: Married
First Section of the Sunday Times: The New York Times Magazine
Favorite television show: Lost. But if they don’t start answering some questions soon, I’m going to pull an Elvis and shoot the TV set.
Guilty pleasure: Video games (A lifetime addiction ever since I first played Pong as a nine-year-old.)
Last book read: Fahrenheit 451 (I re-read it every year.)
Nominated For: General Excellence, Under 100,000 circulation (alongside I.D., Metropolis, Print and Virginia Quarterly Review)

---

So, what the hell is the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists anyway?
We’re the best magazine with the worst title. In its earliest days, the Bulletin was a newsletter. It was founded in 1945 by former Manhattan Project scientists who wanted to inform the public about the dangers of the escalating nuclear arms race.

Our title is deceptive for two reasons: First, it implies that we’re an academic journal — which we’re not. We’re a glossy, full-color magazine targeted towards a mainstream readership. We tend to describe ourselves as a magazine with the credibility of a peer-reviewed journal. Second, we don’t devote our coverage exclusively to nuclear weapons and arms control. Our mandate is to provide readers with non-partisan, non-technical, but scientifically sound information that is critical to the debate on global security. So, we cover a broad range of topics, including terrorism, climate change, global health and the implications of emerging technologies such as nanotechnology and synthetic biology.

And, of course, the Bulletin is famous worldwide for its iconic “Doomsday Clock,” which since 1947 has periodically moved back and forth to indicate how close we are to global catastrophe. [The Bulletin‘s Board of Directors reset the clock to “Five Minutes to Midnight” in January 2007.] In fact, the Bulletin was the inspiration for the title of Linkin Park‘s forthcoming album, Minutes to Midnight. Eat your heart out, New Yorker.

Which outlets does the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists compete with?
Well, unless there’s a Bulletin of the Subatomic Scientists, I believe that we’re a niche unto ourselves. Certainly you can find some similar content in science magazines and current affairs publications, but I think the Bulletin stands alone in how it effectively merges these issues. Moreover, our tremendous credibility in the scientific and academic community gives us unique access to the top experts in their fields. My Rolodex is packed with Nobel Prize winners.

When did you know you wanted to be editor of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists?
Given my interests in both science and international security, the Bulletin was always part of my regular reading list. When I heard the magazine was hiring a new editor, I immediately applied. I felt it was a very good magazine that had the potential to be much better. The editors, the art director, and I spent the last two years reworking the publication. We did a cover-to-cover redesign, introduced new sections, reimagined old sections — and we committed ourselves to diversifying the editorial content and publishing more reader-friendly articles. I guess the nomination suggests that our efforts have not gone unnoticed.

---

“The Bulletin was the inspiration for the title of Linkin Park’s forthcoming album, Minutes to Midnight. Eat your heart out, New Yorker.”

---

What do you think of your Ellies chances?
The Bulletin won the Ellie in 1987 for best single-topic issue, beating out Esquire and Texas Monthly. So, who’s to say that lightning can’t strike twice? I’m quite proud of the content that we submitted, with articles ranging from a debate over the likelihood of a nuclear terrorist attack five years after 9/11 to a reported account of the worsening AIDS pandemic in Burma. [In fact, that article just won a merit award from the Society of Publication Designers.]

Take us through a typical day in the life of Bulletin‘s editor.
When you have a magazine with a staff as small as ours, everyone is multi-tasking — so there’s no such thing as a “typical” day at the Bulletin. But, generally speaking, I arrive at work at 8:30AM. I spend my first 20 minutes deleting spam and reading emails from some guy in Montana who claims to have invented a time machine. My typical day is devoted to editing and top-editing articles, consulting with my editors and art director, and scouting for article ideas. In between, I drink a lot of coffee. Although we’re a bimonthly, the daily pace is pretty brisk. We’ve got a lot of content to publish, and not many people to get the work done, so we need to keep to a very rigid editorial and production schedule.

How do you feel about the state of the industry?
For 20 years, I’ve been hearing apocalyptic predictions about the decline and fall of magazine publishing — so I’m not losing much sleep. Yes, we have to come to terms with the digital age and the new media landscape. But, the magazine industry continues to attract a high percentage of extremely talented, smart people who constantly revitalize the medium. As always, some magazines will adapt and thrive, and others will close shop. But, the industry as a whole continually finds a way to muddle through.

What’s the biggest challenge of your job as an editor?
Translating complex scientific and technical concepts into accessible, readable prose. I mean, when’s the last time you found yourself having to explain to your friends the mechanics of uranium enrichment?

A lot of magazines are currently trying to figure out the Web. Is this a problem for you?
No, it’s not a problem for us. We relaunched our Web site in January, and we’ve been very pleased with the results. Many of the issues we cover are so fluid from day to day that we recognized the need to provide expert analysis in real time. So, we’ve recruited a roster of top-notch scientists and columnists to provide exclusive online coverage around the clock. And, in doing so, we’re also building a community of experts and voices that we can use across all of our media platforms — whether as contributors to the magazine, or as speakers at conferences that we periodically sponsor.

What’s the next step for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists?
The next step is our first step. Our mission hasn’t changed. The key challenge for us is to continue developing innovative ways to act as a bridge between the scientific community and the general public. A magazine is a wonderful thing — a unique medium for delivering information in an engaging format. And we want to keep thinking of ways to make the most of that. Fortunately, I work alongside a very creative, hardworking staff who have zero tolerance for mediocrity.

Finally, what will you be wearing to the Ellies?
Whatever tuxedo my wife picks out for me.

---

[Dylan Stableford is mediabistro.com’s managing editor, media news. He can be reached at dylan AT mediabistro DOT com.]

Leading up to the May 1 2007 National Magazine Awards, mediabistro.com is publishing a special package of our popular interview series, “So What Do You Do?,” with daily interviews of selected nominees, ranging from well-known to obscure. Today we chat with Ted Genoways, editor of last year’s dark horse, The Virginia Quarterly Review.

See our other interviews with Ellie 2007 nominees:
Joyce Rutter Kaye, Editor, Print; David Granger, Editor, Esquire?; Moisés Naím, Editor, Foreign Policy; Jay Stowe, Editor, Cincinnati; Mark Strauss, Editor, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

---

Name: Ted Genoways
Position: Editor, Virginia Quarterly Review
Resumé: Genoways worked at several literary magazines (Prarie Schooner, Callaloo, Merdian [which I founded], and Iowa Review) and small presses (Texas Tech University Press, Coffee House Press, and the Minnesota Historical Society Press). He has also edited a number of books — though “they are mostly poetry titles for academic presses.”
Birthdate: April 13, 1972
Hometown: Born in Lubbock, Texas. “All my family is in Lincoln, Nebraska.”
Education: B.A. in English, Nebraska Wesleyan University, 1994; MA in English, Texas Tech University, 1996; MFA in Creative Writing, University of Virginia, 1999; completing a PhD in English at University of Iowa
Marital status: Married
First Section of the Sunday Times: The Book Review. “I’m usually reading it online some time on Saturday.”
Favorite television show: Deadwood
Guilty pleasure: “I’m a voracious consumer of bad television. MTV’s The Hills and I’m from Rolling Stone, especially amuse me because they seem like some alternate reality. They show the publishing world, but on another planet than mine. I also love watching Fox News. It’s akin to the trash-talking interviews with opposing players that football coaches pin to their team bulletin boards. If my resolve ever flags, I just turn on Fox.”
Last book read: “I read a lot — but the last two poetry books that really knocked me out were Natasha Trethewey’s Native Guard (which just won the Pulitzer) and Kevin Young’s For The Confederate Dead. Both amazing books — and Trethewey and Young are colleagues at Emory. There’s a faculty lounge I’d like to hang out in.”
2007 Nominations: 2 (General Excellence, Fiction)

---

Last year your nominations came as a surprise — a shock, really — to the magazine-watching media in New York. What was that experience like, and how is it different — if at all — this year?
It came as something of a shock to us, too. We’d gotten two nominations in 2005, so we were all hoping that we wouldn’t come up empty in ’06. Then, we got six nominations. Everyone took notice, and it did a lot to boost our profile — but also upped the ante for this year. A lot of media watchers seemed to expect that we’d be disappointed with two nominations this year, but I was delighted. It was our third straight nomination in general excellence, our fourth nomination in three years in fiction. If there’s any big difference, it’s that we’re a bit more philosophical this year. Win or lose, we’re glad to be considered again. And, I think we may have another big year next year — not because the work is better, but because it seems to fit some of the categories better. We’re more philosophical in that way, too — recognizing that we publish what matters to us, then worry about awards later.

As a quarterly, you are competing against monthlies for awards like this. What’s the biggest challenge?
The biggest challenge for us is timeliness. We can’t cover news in the way that weeklies or monthlies do. But, that’s also our advantage. We afford the stories that we select a great deal more length. I think that helps us select our topics and focus in many cases, because we know that we have to be publishing on subjects that warrant 8,000-10,000 words of reporting and analysis.

Since your breakout of sorts last year, have you been approached by bigger media companies for bigger media jobs?
Yes, I have. And, one must always be weighing the options, but I’m extremely happy with my situation here. I’ve got excellent support from the University of Virginia and unfettered freedom in determining the content of the magazine. The larger magazines are tempting, because they reach so many people. But, I want to reach people with the kind of writing that matters to me. If that means reaching a more select audience, then I can live with that.

What do you think of your Ellies chances?
I think they’re probably slim. We won in these two categories last year, and I think it’s pretty tough to repeat — especially in general excellence. I’m planning to go and cheer on the other little magazines like Georgia Review and New Letters.

What’s the biggest challenge of your job as an editor?
Our small staff. We have four full-time employees, so we rely a great deal on freelancers and student assistants. But when crunch time arrives, all of the editorial work falls to me and my managing editor Kevin Morrissey.

Take us through a typical day in the life of VQR‘s editor.
I usually wake up at 8 or so, when my four-year-old son starts demanding cereal and that someone switch on Dragon Tails. I realize that’s a late start for most people, but I do a lot of my work — especially reading unsolicited manuscripts, line editing accepted manuscripts, etc. — between 11PM and 2-3AM. Anyway, I usually talk my wife into taking my son to school, while I answer e-mails and read Google News and the New York Times online. When I hit the office by mid morning, every semblance of a “typical” day disappears. As I said, we’re a staff of four, so it may be that I can steal time to read manuscripts, or it may be that I have to be in regular touch with our copy editor in Denver or our designers in Minneapolis. I may be corresponding with authors in South America or photographers in Iraq. What I like about my day is that it’s never typical. I also like the fact that my wife picks me up at 5, we get our son from school, and we’re all home or out to dinner by 5:30 or 6.

---

“We’re pretty happy with our quarterly status. What I would like is a lot more readers.”

---

How do you feel about the state of the industry?
I think there’s a lot of logical concern about how print will continue to compete against TV and Internet media outlets. For me, the simple solution is that magazines have to place more focus on storytelling and analysis. Television never slows down, never corrects itself, and the Internet [at-large] is a bewildering forest of misinformation. Online magazines like Slate and Salon have achieved a permanent place for themselves online by providing cogent and insightful pieces. Print magazines will survive by doing the same — and they certainly are. Vanity Fair, New Yorker, Harper’s, and the Atlantic are obvious examples. But, there’s also remarkable work being published by mid-sized magazines like Mother Jones and Foreign Policy, and small magazines like Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and Paris Review.

I thought the best reporting of the year was done by Matthew Teague for Philadelphia Magazine (as well as a remarkable piece that he wrote for The Atlantic), the best special issues appeared from Tin House and New Orleans Review, and the best poetry appeared in New England Review and Kenyon Review. What that suggests to me is that print is alive and well. I think these smaller magazines could use an infusion of marketing dollars, but the work is better than ever.

A lot of magazines are currently trying to figure out the Web. Is this a problem for you? Are you, as a “quarterly” insulated by this at all?
The web is a topic of constant discussion in our offices. We’re trying to use it to our fullest advantage — because there are so many more online readers than readers of small quarterlies. So, we put a lot of our current content online, we’re expanding our already extensive online archive, and we’re developing all kinds of web-exclusive content [interviews, audio, manuscripts from our archives]. The biggest challenge is trying to bring our measured approach to a Web environment. We’re still figuring that out, as is everyone else.

What’s the next step for VQR? Go monthly?
God, I hope not. We’d go crazy. We’re pretty happy with our quarterly status. What I would like is a lot more readers — especially paid subscribers. I think that building our readership will be a central focus in the coming years. There’s no money to be made in it, of course, but we see our readership as a measure of our relevance — and that’s what we’re really after. We want our writers to reach more people.

What will you be wearing to the Ellies?
I’ll be wearing some miserable, last-minute tuxedo, as always. Some have suggested that I buy a tux — but that seems like inviting bad luck. So, I wait each year for the list of nominees, then hope the Men’s Wearhouse will have a surplus of tuxes after the prom season. I figure I can’t possibly be as nervous as the last guy who inhabited those clothes.

---

[Dylan Stableford is mediabistro.com’s managing editor, media news. He can be reached at dylan AT mediabistro DOT com.]

Leading up to the May 1, 2007 National Magazine Awards, mediabistro.com is publishing a special package of our popular interview series, “So What Do You Do?,” with daily interviews of selected nominees, ranging from well-known to obscure. Today, we chat with Esquire editor David Granger.

See our other interviews with Ellie 2007 nominees:
Joyce Rutter Kaye, Editor, Print; Moisés Naím, Editor, Foreign Policy; Jay Stowe, Editor, Cincinnati; Ted Genoways, Editor, Virginia Quarterly Review; Mark Strauss, Editor, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

---

Name: David Granger
Position: Editor, Esquire
Resume: “In reverse order: Esquire, GQ, Adweek/Mediaweek, National Sports Daily, SportsInc., Sport, Family Weekly, Muppet Magazine, various stints of unemployment and consulting at various points.”
Birthdate: October 31, 1956
Hometown: Several places in the United States
Education: Masters in English, University of Virginia; Bachelor of Arts, University of Tennessee
Marital status: Married
First Section of the Sunday Times: Real Estate, “which I read on Saturday.”
Favorite television show: Friday Night Lights
Guilty pleasure: [No comment.]
Last book read: “MVP, by James Boice. No wait, Everyman, by Philip Roth.”

---

Getting an Ellie nomination is fairly common for you at this point. Has the excitement of being nominated dulled at all?
Nah. When people do stellar work, it remains rewarding to see that work recognized. Who doesn’t like to be told they’re doing good work?

What do you think of your Ellies chances?
No way to predict. Last year, I assumed we’d be sitting in our chairs all night, politely applauding all our friends. We got two.

You are up against GQ for general excellence. How would you characterize your rivalry with GQ? Do you pay attention to what they do, or ignore them?
For a long time now, I’ve believed that our competition for consumers is not limited to other magazines. We try to create a magazine that can compete with the Web and everything on cable and DVD, as well as other magazines. I don’t think people are deciding between one magazine and another — they’ve got a whole menu of entertainment options and it’s all those outlets that I have to keep abreast of. Plus, I always root for Alan Richman to win a National Magazine Award.

Who’d you rather, ScarJo or Sienna Miller? Also, how has the “Women We Love” franchise grown for the magazine?
That’s an impossible choice and one that’s entirely irrelevant to the possibilities inherent in my life. I can imagine, though, that each would offer distinct delights and complications. As for “Women We Love,” we just have fun with it. A couple years ago, we started doing this long, slow, six-month reveal of who we would be naming the sexiest woman alive in our November issue. It’s been funny and well-received. Against all expectations, men continue to be interested in women, and we try to offer some insight in various places in the magazine in amusing ways.

---

“I can imagine, though, that [ScarJo and Sienna] would offer distinct delights and complications.”

---

What’s the biggest challenge of your job as an editor?
Well, the editorial part is the most rewarding part of the challenge — working with the staff to find ways to push the print medium forward. The more complicated part, though intensely rewarding in its own way, is working with my publisher to move the business of Esquire forward by launching extensions of the Esquire idea and maximizing all the parts of the business — circ, ad sales, manufacturing — that contribute to our success. And, of course, both sides of that equation affect each other in intimate ways.

Take us through a typical day in the life of Esquire‘s editor.
If I’m in New York, wake up at 5:00 a.m. or so, get to the office at 7, read the Times and browse a couple sites. The TV on my computer is on to provide background noise and to alert me if the world blows up. Then, who knows? Some days, I spend the day reacting to the needs of the staff and the corporation. Other days, I’m more proactive and plot out the next issues or the next year, depending on how smart I’m feeling. The key to a good day is getting to talk with the people on my staff. All our good ideas come out of conversation. We’re not big on meetings, unless they have a specific, limited purpose. If it’s a really good day, I get to work on a story on work with [design director David] Curcurito on our cover and have a meal with someone interesting I don’t know well.

How do you feel about the state of the industry?
I feel good. We’re saddled with a few challenges, primarily in the area of how we distribute magazines and how we reach a new potential audience. And, we may be feeling the first effects of advertisers spending more online. But, I think that will pass as everyone learns how to use the Web most effectively. Right now, a lot of advertisers are feeling pressure not to miss out on the Web and are buying ads in a scattershot way. But that will even out.

Creatively, the magazine industry has more potential than it’s ever had and I think one huge advantage we will continue to have in the era of digital and mobile devices is simply our tangibility. Magazines can be beautiful objects as well as providers of information and perspective — and beauty is not a word that often gets associated with consuming content on your phone.

A lot of magazines are currently trying to figure out the Web. Has Esquire figured it out?
Yes.

What’s the next step for Esquire? What’s the next step for you personally?
We have a massive 2008 well along in the planning stages. And it’s amazing how quickly the brand is expanding internationally — this year Esquires from two countries, U.S. and Russia, are each finalists for the magazine of the year at SPD. We also will continue to refine and expand what we’re doing online. And I’m looking forward to the growth of the publication launched last year — Esquire‘s Big Black Book. We’re also in the midst of rolling out some cool little things like five lines of greeting cards based on some of our regular features. Personally? I’m hoping to keep my job a little while longer.

Finally, what will you be wearing to the Ellies?
Dunno. Either something made by Frank Shattuck, a friend of mine who is a master tailor, or a tux I inherited a long time ago. Or, something I just bought from Dunhill.

---

[Dylan Stableford is mediabistro.com’s managing editor, media news. He can be reached at dylan AT mediabistro DOT com.]

The mind of David Koepp (pronounced “kepp”) is a place we should all visit. Stay for a while. And order food. Writer of the screenplays for The Lost World: Jurassic Park, Mission Impossible, Spiderman, and Panic Room, director of Secret Window and Stir of Echoes, he talks about deli suspense, sleep as an editor, how to stare down a huge blockbuster sequel, and why he lives in New York instead of southern California.

Name: David Koepp
Position: Screenwriter, also film director when I’m lucky
Education: B.F.A. in film, UCLA
Hometown: Pewaukee, WI
First script: Against the Law, a.k.a., Common Law, a.k.a., couldn’t sell it to save my life.
Last 3 scripts/movies: War of the Worlds, Ghost Town, “Indiana Jones and the pending title.”
Birthdate: June 9, 1963
Marital Status: married
Family: Wife, Melissa Thomas; sons, Benjamin, Nicholas, and Henry.

What’s the first thing you do when you get to the office?
I drink my double tall skim latte, check my email, and commence the lengthy process of wasting time on the Internet until I am so filled with self-loathing for not writing that actually writing becomes the only way to salvage any shred of my self-image. That usually takes two or three hours.

So you have an office?
Yes. I’ve worked at home on and off over the years, but it gets kinda weird — like, you look up and realize you haven’t been out of the house for 72 hours, and when you do go out in the street and see people, you start sort of cringing. So even though the office is only a dozen blocks from home, I usually figure, “Well, I came all this way, I might as well write something.”

O.K., there’s an office. Do you have ‘people’?
I have a great assistant. He’s also a writer, so we try to stay out of each other’s way.

What’s the first work-related thing you do before you get to the office?
Probably wake up in the middle of the night with an idea that turns out to be no good in the morning. I think the nature of writing is such that you’re always working, or at least always able to be working — “Hey, look at this piece of origami I found on the street! Maybe I can make a scene out of it!”

So much of writing is a matter of recycling and reinterpreting the tiny little minutiae of your own life, but that’s all you’ve got. Of course, the danger with that is that your life and interests can become so narrow and repetitive, as life tends to push us in the direction of anyway, that your writing gets repetitive. I’m writing something now for a director I’ve worked with in the past, and the other day he said, “Didn’t you use a version of this same line in the last movie?” And I said “Hey, I’ve only got so many tricks, man.” But I’m working on that.

You live in New York City, so there are no bungalows and lunches at The Palm with agents… or are there?
No bungalows or studio lots, but you can always have lunch at The Palm if you want. Agents and studio executives and directors and producers — they all come to New York. I really love working in Hollywood, but living in New York, it’s a much calmer lifestyle for me. Being in Los Angeles arouses the crazy-competitive-fearful side of my nature. I couldn’t walk into [popular West Coast coffee chain] the Coffee Bean [and Tea Leaf] without noticing how many people had laptops with screenplays on the screen. It felt like they were all breathing down my neck trying to take my job. Which they are, but it’s easier to put that out of your mind when you live in New York.

What are you working on now? And if you can’t tell us, make something up.
I wrote the script for the new Indiana Jones movie, which starts shooting in June. I’m doing rewrites now. I’ve been trying like hell for about two years to get a certain movie going for myself to direct, but that is an endeavor roughly equivalent to pushing a large beached whale back into the sea.

First thing you have to do in any writing job is put all the voices out of your head and write a movie that you, yourself, would enjoy seeing. Any other approach and you’re chasing the parade instead of leading it.

How do you approach a project like Indiana Jones, that has such history? Is it daunting to write a sequel to such a blockbuster? Did you approach this script in any different ways because of its legacy?
I’d be a fool if I didn’t consider the history and impact of the Indiana Jones movies before starting this one. I mean, Raiders was the movie that made me first consider screenwriting as a valid career choice. Until then, it had never occurred to me that somebody actually WROTE these things and that, in this case anyway, it seemed like they had a pretty good time at the office while they were doing it. Of course, I’m somewhat daunted by the past when trying to push “Indy” into the present, but the first thing you have to do in any writing job is put all the voices — studio, critics audience, etc. — out of your head and write a movie that you, yourself, would enjoy seeing. Any other approach and you’re chasing the parade instead of leading it.

I also think there’s a huge risk of writing a “fan” movie in this case, instead of writing an actual movie. I tried to approach this as a standalone movie; you don’t need to have seen the others to appreciate or enjoy it.

Other than that, the truth is, I only know one way to write, so I wrote it that way.

What is your level of involvement with a movie once the script is done? Any torturous rewrites requested by lame-brained ferrets?
The best projects for me are the ones where I can be involved from inception all the way through looping at the end. Those are satisfying experiences. During shooting, though, I tend to stay away as much as I can. I used to go to the set all the time when I was younger, but the actors and director have a tendency to see me as a big walking keyboard and want to bang on me (so to speak).

There’s a great temptation to change things on the day, new ideas always sound better because they’re fresh, and just different from the stuff you’ve been working over and over for a couple years. But you have to resist that temptation; just because you’re tired of the other stuff doesn’t mean it isn’t good. It’s held up for two years for a reason. My hope is that if I stay away, they’ll shoot what’s on the page.

As you are a very successful screenwriter and director, are there contracts that prohibit ferrets from changing your work?
Absolutely none. Nobody, but nobody, has those kind of guarantees as a screenwriter, and the only way to get them as a director is to have a couple hits so that you can negotiate final cut into your contract. Moviemaking is a very rough-and-tumble business, creatively speaking, and if you’ve got no taste for the fray, you’d better stay away.

How are you a better director as a screenwriter or vice versa?
They’re separate disciplines, but I think that doing one job helps you understand the other one better, or at least more sympathetically. I think that goes for all the disciplines on a movie — directors should take a few acting classes to see what it feels like, actors should try to write a script or two to get a feel for the big picture, and writers should try directing so they can experience what a director means when he says, “Say it with pictures.”

How difficult is it to see the final movie with your words completely changed? On average, how much are your words changed?
I’ve been lucky to have had mostly great experiences with directors, and I think it’s because I’ve gotten to work with talented and secure people. It’s the ones who, deep down, know that they kinda suck, who are a drag to work with, because they’re threatened by everyone and everything around them: including the sunrise — so they develop a tendency to trample those around them to remind themselves they’re in charge. And, they can do that because of their job title. The result is usually not so good. Sometimes it’s best to just take a hike early on when you smell that process coming.

Tell me about your writing process: Is it linear, do you work on several scripts at once?
Of course, the best thing is to work on one thing at a time, but that doesn’t seem to be the nature of freelance work: it’s usually feast or famine. And, no movie ever went into production because the writer’s schedule opened up, so when the great and happy moment of having a movie made comes along, it’s usually at the worst possible time for me, in terms of work and my personal life. But, it’s a dilemma I will happily take.

Do you keep notes and notebooks with you at all times?
Whenever I start with a new script idea, I buy one of those marbled composition books like we used to have in school, and if the thing ends up getting made, I fill a couple of them by the end. Of course, I have a bunch of notebooks that have splashy titles on the cover, two pages of notes inside, and the rest stayed blank forever.

My wife recently bought me a bunch of notecards in a little box for my nightstand, because I usually think of stuff that seems important as I’m falling asleep, and that’s been great. Ideas are your currency, and you never know when they’re going to show up, so you’d better take care of them.

Describe your writing ‘area’ — any rules for yourself? Schedule you try to adhere to? Special pens, paper, pets? Strange routines we would delight in hearing?
My writing area is an L-shaped desk facing a wall. The left side of the L is the computer and other writing-related stuff, the right side of the L is anything else. I used to have a view out a window, but that was a huge mistake: I barely wrote anything for six months. So, I closed the blinds and turned to face the wall, and got a lot more done.

As for a schedule and a routine, I would absolutely love to have one, but I think I lack the discipline. I get there when I can, and I stay as long as I can take it. The only thing I do with consistency is order lunch. I order one of only two menu items every single day from the coffee shop across the street, and I am so consistent I no longer need to identify myself when I call. Sample conversation:

ME
Hi, can I have my tuna sandwich now?

DELI GUY
Okay, buddy.

Click. The only variation is:

ME
Hi, scrambled egg whites and cheese on a roll please?

DELI GUY
Okay, buddy.

I like that last order in particular, because of the natural tension between the egg whites and the cheese.

Describe your awareness of what’s going on in the world when you’re writing: Did you know that Anna Nicole Smith died?

Jesus, I’m not a hermit.

In fact, when I’m writing I’m always exceptionally well-informed about bullshit media stories, because I spend so much time working up my self-disgust on the Internet.

What is the most interesting media story you’re aware of right now?
I’d have to go with that war we got goin’ on.

What’s the first thing you bought with your first big check, from selling a script?
I bought time on a mixing stage so we could finish Apartment Zero, an independent movie I cowrote and produced that had run out of money in post[-production]. I sold a screenplay called Bad Influence around that time, and plowed the money back into Apartment Zero. John Kamps, a very funny and wonderful writer whom I partner with sometimes, had also worked on Apartment Zero, and we took a couple of disreputable rewrite jobs (which we were lucky to get) around that time to pay for the rest of post. I never saw the money again, but I still think it was well-spent.

Your work is broad — thrillers, comedy, drama… Is Hollywood more comfortable niche-ing writers and directors? (Yes, I made that word up.)
Oh, Hollywood nichifies like crazy, and you can’t really blame them. I mean, I wouldn’t hire a plumber to build my kitchen cabinets. It’s your responsibility to continually try to force your way out of your niche, and they’re not going to let you do that on their dime. I try to write on spec at least every year or two, and even in the cases where I haven’t been able to sell them, they’ve been good experiences. Frustrating, sure, but you learn a lot about different kinds of writing, and there’s nothing that feels quite as good and clean as the feeling of writing a first draft of something that nobody knows or cares about.

What’s your favorite movie? Why?
Probably Rosemary’s Baby. It’s just the perfect blend of character study and genre movie, and that is so incredibly hard to pull off — it’s right up there with hitting a curveball or writing a good pop song. The writing, the performances, the direction, there’s just not a wrong note anywhere in it, and, it’s massively entertaining.

What is your favorite movie as a screenwriter?
There are so many. His Girl Friday, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Sunset Boulevard, Tootsie, The Apartment, Jaws, Dr. Strangelove, Double Indemnity, The Godfather — you know, it just goes on and on.

As a director…
John Ford’s cavalry trilogy (Fort Apache, She Wore a Yellow Ribbon, and Rio Grande) and, you know, see above list. I think with really great filmmaking, you can’t spot the line between writing and directing very easily. A recent movie that was just astonishingly well-directed is Children of Men. I was overcome by how good it was.

What’s the last book you read, or what are you reading now?
I just swore off any more Iraq books, because I read them all, and halfway through the last one, I felt I got the point — we kinda screwed the pooch over there.

I’m reading another Patricia Highsmith novel now, this one’s called The Blunderer, which is about a would-be criminal who makes every mistake in the world. [It’ll] never be a movie — audiences would throw things at the screen — but [it’s] fascinating to watch her characters slowly rip themselves apart through sheer self-destructiveness.

What were the challenges to break into the business when you started out?
Same as it is now: “Who the fuck are you?” But, what is usually perceived as the hard part — getting your script read — is actually much easier than the process of actually writing a great story. If you can do that, it’ll be easy to find somebody to sell it for you.

What are the challenges now that you are successful and established?
Staying motivated and self-critical and hardworking, because there is just absolutely no substitute for hard work. And, as I slide inexorably into middle age, the challenge becomes to stay relevant and to make myself irreplaceable. If anybody figures out how to do that, please let me know, because I have yet to see a single human being pull it off.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This interview contains excerpts, and has been edited for clarity.]

Arick Wierson can tell you that working in TV ruins your viewing habits. As general manager of NYC TV, he thinks there are two qualities you need to make it in television, and tells you three of them. What’s in your TV future? Jimmy Choos, for one. And, hopefully, fewer connections in his TV room.

Name: Arick Wierson
Position: General Manager
Media: TV, Radio, Broadband & Mobile
Company: NYC TV / NYC Media Group
Education: BS in Foreign Service from Georgetown University, MS in Economics from UNICAMP (São Paulo State University at Campinas, Brazil)
Hometown: Excelsior, MN (suburb of Minneapolis)
First job: Analyst, Investment Banking (JP Morgan)
Last 3 jobs: Vice President, ABN AMRO Bank, CEO, Comjunta (Internet start-up in Brazil), 2001 Bloomberg for Mayor Campaign
Birthdate: November 23, 1971
Marital status: Married (with a 2-year-old daughter)

What’s the first thing you do when you get to the office?
I like to walk around. See who is in, what they’re working on, you know — chit-chat. Our main offices are on four different floors, so people can come and go and not cross paths unless you make an effort to get out and about.

What’s the first work-related thing you do before you get to the office?

I check my Blackberry (I keep it on my bed stand). I usually have 30-40 new emails that have come in overnight.

When Mayor Bloomberg tapped you to helm NYC TV you didn’t have much if any TV experience. What have you learned about the TV business that surprised you?
It’s surprising, in some respects, how risk-averse some parts of the TV industry are. Although it’s changing (and quickly, I might add), many TV execs really adhere to a “herd mentality” when it comes to programming, deal-making — you name it. I’m always of the mind that it’s better to try new things knowing that you might fail than to stay with what’s tried and safe. Makes life more interesting, too!

What did you learn about running a TV station that surprises you?
I’m not sure there were any surprises. I think the glitz and glamour of industry sometimes fogs people’s perception that TV is a business. Sure, there are some peculiarities in a business that lives off of a creative product, but if you place the right bets, plan and execute, you’ll find success.

What’s the most challenging part of your day? Your job?
There is one main reason NYC TV has been such a success, and that’s because of the team we have assembled. Managing expectations, resolving conflicts, making sure everyone has an opportunity for input — that’s the challenging part of a people-intensive business.

How much TV do you watch?

The funny thing is that I never used to watch much TV at all. Now, between work and home, TV and the Web, I probably consume 2-3 hours a day of content.

What do you watch for ‘research’ for your job?
That’s a great question. I’ve watched one episode of countless programs because I feel the need to know what’s out there; I have to see what’s working, and what’s not. I also try to watch a lot of stuff on the Web. I think that many of the next big ideas in TV will arise on broadband.

How has your TV watching changed since taking your position at NYC TV?
I pay attention to things that drive my wife crazy when we’re watching something together: I’ll rewind a special effect on CSI to see exactly how a shot was composed, or I’ll keep a record of when commercial breaks occur in shows, things the casual viewer probably doesn’t even think or care about. And, of course, I always watch the credits in slo-mo now.

You recently partnered with NBC — how has that changed the station for you?
I think that the NBC deal was important in the sense that beforehand, everyone saw the shows, all the Emmys we were racking up, and our ratings, yet I don’t think the local media industry was sure what to make of us. The NBC deal signaled that we had arrived. It has opened a lot of doors for us.

What is in the future for NYC TV? Where do you see it in 5 years, with all the changes facing television, the web, networks?
Right now, NYC TV is basically a linearly programmed channel. NYC TV will continue to grow and expand its lifestyle programming revolving around New York City, but expect us to be offering up that content on an increasingly diverse portfolio of platforms, where the viewer/consumer is in charge. In fact, we believe that going forward, our viewers will also be our producers. We are developing a project focused on user-generated content — a show called Press Play — an area that will really take off in a city like New York.

What’s your favorite TV show? Why?
Friday Night Lights on NBC. It has great storytelling, believable actors, and it’s beautifully composed.

What do you read that informs you about your industry — not just industry periodicals, but anything.
I read B&C, TV Week, Multichannel, etc. like everyone else. TV Newsday does a good job of aggregating what’s out there in print and online. Every TV exec should keep an eye on TVTracker. Some blogs that I like to look at are Paidcontent.org and TVNewser. I also pay a lot of attention to Internet Protocol Television-related news [where a digital television is delivered via the Internet], and there the main source is CedMagazine.com.

What’s the last book you read (really, finished)?
Acquired Tastes by Peter Mayle. It was perfect beach-reading material for a recent family vacation in Mexico.

Where do you think TV is going? Not just government TV, but the medium in general? Describe how we’ll view the tube in 10 or 20 years.
Wow. 20 years? It’s funny a question because I always tell my students (I teach an MBA program on the economics of TV and Radio at MCNY) to never try to predict what is going to happen in TV more than five years going forward.

Anyway, here are some things that I feel comfortable betting on in the next few years (but I won’t tell you what happens when!):

1) Sooner rather than later — easy to use technology bringing your Internet downloads to the HDTV large-screen. Apple, TiVO and others are bridging this gap and it won’t be long before this technology goes mainstream.
2) Not tomorrow, but not too far off — seamless user interface for transitioning between broadband, broadcast and cable linear and on-demand channels. It won’t be too long before LX.TV and YouTube are much like other on-demand channels you see on cable.
3) Not for quite a while, but when it happens, strap yourself in — transactional TV advertising: you like the pair of Jimmy Choo sandals that Carrie is wearing on Sex in the City, just press pause, click on the shoe in the video, and buy.

So many young people want to get into television — believing it’s all green rooms with melon, George Clooney and champagne. Describe the TV business to those who may be thinking about jumping in.
I am a bit of a contrarian when it comes to getting involved in the media biz too early in your career. Unless you are a young starlet with the clock ticking, I think the best skill set you can bring to the media business is life experience itself. Go work in consulting, finance, government, advertising — even PR. See the world. Live abroad. Learn a second language. These are the intangibles that the media executive of the future will bring to the business.

What qualities do you believe successful talent in TV must possess?

1) Energy and drive.

2) Smile and be friendly.
3) Reread 2. I don’t know how many times the slightly less talented, or slightly less good-looking talent has snatched away a job from a slightly better qualified person because of personality issues. Everyone works long hours and no one wants to hang out with someone with attitude.

What qualities must executives possess?
I think that the core characteristic of a solid TV exec is strong right-brain / left-brain balance. Execs need to have the creative instincts to know what will work, how to package and present something, and the analytical and organizational skills to shepherd along the creative process and create value. That may seem obvious, but I’ve seen several textbook examples of people who fail as they move into executive roles because while they excel in one area, they have few skills in the other. Balance is the key.

What do you think is the most interesting story on TV, about TV right now?
Well it appears that Studio 60 is headed for greener pastures, so I’m not sure what that says about the TV industry turning the lens back on itself. That being said, I think 30 Rock has some shelf-life.

What do you do at work when you don’t want to do anything?
I guess when I feel myself fading there’s nothing like a jolt of Red Bull.

What do you read first everyday? What section of the paper do you read first?
The Post, Times and Journal arrive around 5:30 AM every morning. I read them differently depending on the day of the week. For example, the Monday Times business section is generally very media-heavy. And since NYC TV is, after all, a local network, I always get to the Metro Section.

Okay, what does the TV room look like at home? How many premium channels? Who gets the remote?
In the main living room we have a 42″ Samsung HDTV connected to surround-sound speakers, DVD player, stereo with a CD player with an iPod connector. I also have a Canupus analog/digital converter hooked up to a Powerbook so I can capture parts of shows that I like and email Quicktimes to people on staff. As far as channels, I have pretty much everything that Time-Warner Cable offers.

Ray Richmond watches television for a living. While this might be a dream job for some, Richmond insists that it’s brutally hard work. His weekly column, “The Pulse,” appears in The Hollywood Reporter, is syndicated by Reuters, and is a must-read in Hollywood, while his blog, Past Deadline is a daily stop for readers addicted to his cynical, yet sentimental, outlook on television, pop culture and the media.

When approached we approached him for this interview, Richmond shunned the usual give-and-take of the process, and wrote it all himself. He then sent it to himself for editing, and sent it back for a rewrite. Finally, we were able to wrestle it away from him:

Name: Ray Richmond
Position: TV critic/entertainment columnist
Publication: The Hollywood Reporter
Company: The Nielsen Company (formerly VNU)
Education: B.A. Degree, Califiornia State University @ Northridge, 1980; A.A. Degree, Los Angeles Valley College, 1977; Diploma, Hollywood High School, 1975
Hometown: Born in Whittier, CA (hometown of Richard M. Nixon, thanks very much), and raised literally in and around Hollywood, and its rundown suburban environs.

First job: I had a couple at the same time, actually. I earned $1.65 per hour flipping burgers and dropping fries at Carl’s Jr. in Hollywood for a few months. (I was 15, but managed to alter my birth certificate to appear 16). I also worked as a vendor at Dodger Stadium in the early-to-mid 1970s, selling Cokes and ice cream and (occasionally) peanuts in the stands. (Peanuts were the prime product; you needed mucho seniority to work your way up to these, and I never quite got there.) To this day, I have a measure of regret. The job kept me in superb shape, toting 24 bottles of Coke on my back up and down stairs on hot Sundays. Then, there was the day a gang member grabbed one of my bottles, and used it to attack a fellow gangbanger in the stands. That wasn’t a good day.

Last three jobs: (This presumes what I’m currently doing is considered a “job”): TV reporter/critic/columnist, The Hollywood Reporter, 2000-present; TV reporter/critic, Daily Variety, 1997-99; TV critic/columnist, The Los Angeles Daily News, 1992-96

Birthdate: October 19, 1957. I turned 30 the day the stock market crashed (Depression Jr.). It was a helluva way to enter official yuppiehood.

Marital status: Twice-divorced. (I wave a white flag, ladies; you win.)

Favorite TV show: The Office (NBC edition). Steve Carell. Rainn Wilson. It’s not TV, it’s art.

Last book read: To quote the immortal Chauncey Gardener, “I don’t read books. I watch TV.” If pressed, however, I will admit to having read The Greatest Story Ever Sold: The Decline and Fall of Truth From 9/11 to Katrina by Frank Rich. And a terrific read it was.

Most interesting media story right now: The shakeout that finds print journalism fighting to hold onto its niche — any niche at all will do — and the cyber world essentially usurping it with its immediacy and reach.

Guilty pleasures: Extra-sharp aged cheddar — life is too short not to always have some on hand. Taking in my dog to get groomed monthly, which is God’s way of telling me I’m probably too well off. My National Enquirer subscription (I always shower immediately after digesting). Tom Goes to the Mayor on Cartoon Network.

There is an enormous amount of great stuff available on the 17.4 million channels that now exist. There’s a lot of crap, too, but anyone who believes TV can’t carry cinema’s jock just ain’t paying attention.

First section I read in the Sunday paper: Somebody still reads the Sunday paper? Wow, how last century is that? Actually, I still do receive The L.A. Times 7 days a week, though it causes people in my building to look at me dismissively and mutter under the breath, “Oh hey, if it isn’t Joe Intellectual. College grad scum.”

What I mean is, I usually pick up the Sports section first, under the philosophy that there are no guarantees in life and one should, therefore, eat dessert first. Once I’m fully informed about what’s going down in the NBA, and which spoiled millionaires are bitching about their various meritless paternity suits, I dive into the front section.

How I got into journalism: Oh, is this journalism? God, why didn’t someone tell me before I went and committed my whole life to it. I am SO embarrassed. Wow.

I’ve been doing this stuff since my first year of college, when I worked for a regional newspaper chain on the West side covering high school football and basketball on Friday nights for $5.00 per story. It was a big deal when we got a 50 percent raise to $7.50. I caught on part-time at the L.A. Daily News — then still called the Valley News and Green Sheet — while finishing my higher education at Cal State Northridge in 1978-79. I penned features and short press release rewrites about things such as the Miniature Rose Club of Greater Pacoima. I worked at the Daily News until 1985, crossing over from general features to TV critique fulltime in 1984. I moved from there to “The Merv Griffin Show” for 10 months in 1985-86, then back into TV critique and reportage for the late Los Angeles Herald-Examiner (may it rest in peace) in 1986-87. From there, I went to the Orange County Register as TV critic for five years (1987-92), and then back to the Daily News as TV critic (1992-96). Finally, I jumped to the trade world and Daily Variety in 1997, to cover and review TV, then to the Hollywood Reporter. My duties with the Reporter began small and have steadily increased year by year, adding the column in 2002, and the blog in 2006.

What my average media day is like: I’ll devour my L.A. Times (that takes roughly 125 seconds), and scour various online sites (including, uh, mediabistro.com) in the morning. I may watch a DVD or two that I have to review. Then, I’ll make some phone calls setting up interviews, and get “Past Deadline” up to date before indulging in a languid three-hour lunch with the Davids (Katzenberg, Geffen, Duchovny) at The Ivy. Actually, lunch is processed turkey on whole wheat at my desk. I’ll read some more and write some more, and yak on the phone some more. I’ll head off on my five-second commute from the desk to the living room (I work at home). If I ever run into gridlock during this commute, I’ll know it’s time to give the men in the white suits a call.

Isn’t television the ugly stepsister to film? How do I deal with the indignity? Oh that’s ridiculously easy. I don’t consider TV the ugly stepsister at all, or even the ugly step-person — must be politically correct here. Television is the most pervasive medium on the planet, and there is an enormous amount of great stuff available on the 17.4 million channels that now exist. There’s a lot of crap, too, but anyone who believes TV can’t carry cinema’s jock just ain’t paying attention. The big screen, I dare say, has more meritless crud percentage-wise. The creative gulf between the two is hardly as vast as it was once thought. Any medium that has The Simpsons and The Sopranos need not apologize for anything. That said, I’m not altogether sure that TV critics serve much of a real purpose. TV is such an impulse buy — a five-second time investment, potentially — that it can feel occasionally like spitting into the wind, a headwind at that.

Do I ever want to use my cool inside knowledge to pitch a show? I stopped thinking that way after I sidled up to a certain network entertainment president and said, “I’ve got a show for you.” He asked, “What’s it about?” And I said: “Nothing.” That was our last conversation, as I recall.

Any illusions about Hollywood shattered now that I’m here? Since I literally grew up here — comparing my handprints and footprints to those at the Chinese Theater from the time I was four — I’ve always felt rather clued in just by virtue of absorbing the environment throughout my life. On the other hand, it was hugely shocking and devastating to learn that, for instance, Hoss and Little Joe didn’t actually live on the Ponderosa (they were merely actors pretending to live there) and — more recently — that showbiz agents are occasionally disingenuous, and often merely out for themselves. It remains flat-out astonishing.

How do I choose what to cover in TV? I’m assigned reviews by the Reporter‘s chief critic Barry Garron. I often am obliged to review the second-tier stuff that’s on Hallmark Channel, BBC America, and Oxygen, whose slogan ought to be, “Way less breast cancer programming than Lifetime!” I also simply follow what’s in the news, as far as subject matter for my Tuesday column (“The Pulse”), and in updating the blog regularly. Of course, the Isaiah Washington “faggot” story remains the biggest single event of our lifetime. So I continue to be all over that. I think it’s so huge because Washington is the first man in the history of this great nation to openly disparage homosexual men. So it’s easy to understand the ongoing obsession. I’ve a feeling this is merely the tip of the iceberg. Someone will go off on a Jew, and be forced to enter anti-semite rehab (“Repeat after me: I support the state of Israel…”). But seriously, most of what I cover is either obvious or assigned to me, which is cool.

Do I still get a little kick out of being at the Hollywood Reporter and pretending to be a big shot? You know, I do. It’s not an ego trip so much as an ego side-journey. It still baffles me that I write it, they publish it, and people read it. I’ve lived in constant neurotic fear that at any moment, someone would knock on my door and tell me, “I’m from The Hollywood Reporter. They wanted me to deliver the message that this just isn’t working out anymore. The jig is up. We’re on to you. We all know you can’t write. Nice going, being able to fake it for the better part of three decades. But it’s over. Drop the keyboard, and step away from the monitor, please.” That it hasn’t happened yet is an ongoing joy. I still get a charge out of seeing my name and my writing in print. It looks so… grown-up.

Proudest moment of my career: This one. Right now. Oh, and the time I was sitting on a sofa with George Burns, while working as a talent coordinator and segment producer for “The Merv Griffin Show” in 1985, and he said, “You know kid, you got a great mug. You ever thought about being in showbiz?” True story. I’ve also smoked Cubans (not the people, the cigar) with Milton Berle at the Friar’s Club, and interviewed Lucille Ball at her Beverly Hills home in 1984. She got blasted on strawberry margaritas, and I with her. She talked about how much she loved Vivian Vance and cried. Just she and I sharing her couch and cocktails and old stories: It was an out-of-body experience.

Biggest influence on my work: The contemporary stylings of Isaac Mizrahi. That, and the feminine grace with which Katie Couric recites her script from a Teleprompter. Those aside, I get actual inspiration from fellow journalists like my friend Cathy Seipp, who freelances for many publications including National Review, and is so fearless in her commentary that I sometimes feel phony and dishonest by comparison for playing the game by the rules rather than challenging and probing as she does. She tosses the bodies around seemingly without fear of reprisal. If I’ve learned anything in all of my years as an ink-stained hack, it’s that there is no substitute for honesty and integrity. Minus those, as a member of the media you have nothing. If you harbor sacred cows and espouse views fueled by compromise/conflict, you’re in the wrong business.

Coolest story I ever worked on: See Lucille Ball interview above.

Pet story loved/worked on that got killed late in the process: In the early ’70s, I was assigned to cover a break-in at the Watergate Hotel that was traced back to the current Presidential Administration. But my editors were concerned that to overplay the story would be perceived as alarmist and scandalmongering, so it was bumped to page 16 and buried with the headline, “Watergate Hotel Burglarized, Seen By Everyone As Really No Big Deal At All.” And there went my Pulitzer.

If I weren’t a journalist/writer, what would I do? God, probably comb trash dumpsters for bottles and cans, or be forced to call people at random hoping to convince them to change their long-distance carrier (not quite as fulfilling as collecting the recyclables). I might try to teach. English. Badly. Good thing I wound up here. I clearly have no other marketable skill.

How I kick back: I don’t, actually. Explains a lot, doesn’t it?

Kate Coe is the co-editor of FishbowlLA

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This interview contains excerpts, and has been edited for clarity.]