Think back to what the media landscape was like 20 years ago. 
     There was no CNBC or "Lou Dobbs Tonight," no Fast Company or Business 2.0. There was no CBS MarketWatch or TheStreet.com, of course, because there was no web.
     In other words, for a magazine like Business Week, today's world is a very different place, one where catching and holding the attention of readers is that much harder, and still more so when the economic news is bad.
     The sweeping redesign on view in the new issue of Business Week is meant as a reflection of that. Visually, everything about the magazine has been made bolder: the table of contents, the typefaces, the photos, the graphics.
    The idea is to cut through today's higher level of static, says editor in chief Stephen Shepard. 
   "There's been a fragmentation in the media world in recent years,” says Shepard. “People are getting their information online and from cable TV as well as from traditional newspaper and magazines. We just felt we had to stand out more in a more competitive world.” 
    That the makeover comes just as business magazines stand ready to emerge from a three-year advertising recession is no coincidence.
    Although the downturn killed off a number of New Economy magazines such as The Industry Standard and Red Herring, their influence can be seen in Business Week's more in-your-face look, much as the arrival of Martha Stewart Living and Real Simple forced older women's service books to pretty themselves up.
    Meanwhile, another effect of the recession has been to drive casual readers, who prefer good news to bad, from the category.
    Newsstand sales of Business Week have been falling ever since the stock market began its tumble in mid-2000. In the first half of this year, average single-copy sales fell 10.9 percent to 25,027. (Forbes and Fortune recorded similar declines.) 
     Shepard points out that newsstand sales make up only about 2.5 percent of Business Week's total paid circulation. 
   "It matters a little. I'd rather sell a few more than not, but it's not what this is about,” he says. 
   "I attach much more importance to what I call the second newsstand. That is when the magazine arrives in the subscriber's home or office and lands on his desk or coffee table and he looks at it and says either ‘Oh, boy, I want to read that' or ‘Oh, I'll read that later.'” 
    Business Week's overall circulation was up 1.4 percent in the first half of 2003 to 990,584. 
     Editorially, Shepard says the transition from boom to scandal-plagued bust has required an adjustment in editorial approach on the part of Business Week's staff, with stories of corporate malfeasance now dominating headlines in place of buzzy start-ups. 
    "The main change I would say is that we have engaged in much more training of our people in accounting,” says Shepard. “We're trying to raise the financial sophistication of the reporters so that they can keep up with all the machinations that are going on.” 
     Like Forbes and Fortune, Business Week is down a staggering 55 percent in year-to-date ad pages compared to its level in August 2000. 
     But Bill Kupper, Business Week's president and publisher, says the turnaround is no longer a matter of speculation. 
   "I think that the majority of the sector will tell you that business is slowly coming back,” he says. “There's a lot of pent-up demand. A lot of companies are indicating to us that they've got money to spend in the fourth quarter. I see a definite uptick and a slow return to branding, but not at a gallop.” 
     Even the technology category has started to improve, although improvement is limited to the 10 or 12 biggest advertisers, says Kupper. 
   "It's that second and third layer that used to be pretty consistent advertisers that are now holding back,” he says. 
   "Right now we're 25 percent behind last year in new companies advertising with us. That's just a reflection of the lack of new companies being created or having the money to spend.”