The turbulent years that engulfed editors Kenneth Wood and Bill Johnsson eventually ended.1 “The anger slowly subsided,” wrote Johnsson. “Many ministers and members, weary of argument, tuned out theological discussion. And, of course, many no longer were with us—they had dropped out. Then as the nineties drew near, I began to sense that the halcyon days were gone. We had entered a new era. . . . The church would never return to the relative calm, ordered patterns of the 1960s and 1970s.”2
Johnsson was often focused on circulation. “My biggest headache—one that was with me from the first day until the last—was the decline in circulation.”3 This wasn’t unique to him, as former editors were similarly afflicted. But one challenge previous editors didn’t have to deal with was that while Johnsson and the editors that preceded him had offices located within the Review and Herald Publishing Association (RHPA), a vote had moved the Review to the General Conference (GC) during Johnsson’s editorship. The consequences of this action were significant.
In this historical split, the GC became the owner/publisher of the Review, but the financial portion was left with the RHPA. This meant that all the revenues from subscriptions and advertising sales went to the publishing house while they, in turn, reimbursed the GC for the editor salaries and office operating expenses.4 With this change, Johnsson no longer knew the finances of the magazine. When the RHPA decided to raise subscription prices, it impacted circulation. “For the house, the bottom line was profit,” said Johnsson. “For the editors, the bottom line was circulation. We knew that every time the price went up, we lost readers, and that bothered us. No doubt it bothered the house some, but not as much as it bothered us, because [for them] the Review remained profitable.”5
Competition for Subscriptions
Johnsson battled more than subscription prices. Many advances occurred within communications that affected readers’ choices. People watched more television and read less. They found church news in independent Adventist publications. Union papers increased pages, with local church news causing some members to become more interested in what was close by than in the regional or world church. Maintaining circulation was a constant struggle, with competition on every side. Johnsson’s personal goal was to have 100,000 subscribers. This meant finding 30,000 more. Not only were finances under the RHPA, so was marketing, yet another thing over which Johnsson had no control. But it didn’t stop the editor from thinking like a salesman, a role he never expected.
This began a never-ending cycle of revamping the Review. Johnsson admitted to freshening the magazine about every three years, meaning something was different either in content or appearance.6 Research demonstrated a complete overhaul of the publication twice in his 24 years as editor—in 1986 and 10 years later, in 1996. Again, all with an eye on circulation. The optimism always remained that if one simply changed this, that, or something else, readers would flock to subscribe. Unfortunately, not only did this not happen, a few decisions were made that, while smart, creative, and original, ended up not helping but hurting circulation.
In the mid-eighties an idea began to circulate about the need for a paper specifically for the North American Division (NAD). Johnsson, already competing for readers’ attention, believed that introducing yet another paper would affect Review circulation. He approached NAD president Charles Bradford with a creative solution. The Review was a weekly producing four issues a month. What if one week was “given” to the NAD?7 Thus the idea of the NAD edition was born—an issue intentionally created for North American readership. A surprising development was that it would be financially supported by entities within the NAD so that each member in the division received it for free. Johnsson was ecstatic. This was much more than he had anticipated, thus leading to yet another decision—redesigning the Review to make an impact.
It didn’t stop the editor from thinking like a salesman, a role he never expected.
A New Review
Johnsson jumped in with both feet. An extensive survey of subscribers as well as nonsubscribers was conducted by the Institute of Church Ministry at Andrews University. Until this time, feedback for the Review typically came from the letters received, but this time there was an attempt to quantify what readers liked and found inspiring. The buildup to the 1986 new Review was intentional and transparent. The results of the survey were released in a two-part article by the editor.8 These findings prompted the choice of articles as well as the overall design. The survey provided a defense against the discontinuation of favorite sections, as well as the inclusion of new ideas.
“Beginning in 1986, the Adventist Review will have a bright new look. The cover will be dynamic, fresh; the entire inside of the magazine will be redesigned. Ours is a dynamic church; the church paper should show it by appearance and content. . . . We do not intend to become sensational or blatant to attract new readers. We seek a blend of vigor and dignity, of freshness and good taste.”9 Later in his first editorial in the new Review Johnsson explained four convictions: It will project the character of the church; it must be a paper for the whole church; people have a right to know; and it comes with a slant.10
Overall, the launch was a success. Most readers were enthusiastic, but as always, there were a few naysayers. Years later Johnsson, in looking back (as is frequently the case), felt the 1986 new Review looked “anything but attractive.”11 But he admitted the experience was exciting and “heady.” It was a time of analysis and creativity and a coming together of the Review team to develop a new and refreshing product. Subscriptions began to pour in, just as hoped. The idea of the free edition seemed to work: if members could see the Review, they would subscribe to it. For a while this proved to be correct . . . until it wasn’t. Soon subscriptions began to falter, eventually falling below where they were in 1985. Many felt there was no reason to subscribe when receiving an issue for free. Now it wasn’t simply an issue of competition, but of money and time. While Johnsson had no regrets, it was a disappointing realization to reaching his 100,000 goal.
Later Johnsson reflected on the new Review using some of the same descriptive phrases of previous editors: “The Review’s basic role has been the same since 1850—to bind Adventists together. . . . The Review has a pastoral role. . . . But it also has a prophetic role . . . in calling God’s people to justice, righteousness, and revival.”12 Disappointed in circulation, he still felt the Review had widened its reach. Letters from younger readers arrived; Blacks and Hispanics felt more included. Ever and always optimistic, he wrote, “I think the Review will be used by the Lord to do what it does best—to help keep the church on course.”13
The Nineties Bring Change
A hot topic was women’s ordination, an item on the agenda of the 1985, 1990, and 1995 General Conference sessions. “It became the hottest topic the Review handled,” Johnsson remembered. It was divisive, with proponents on each side, including within the Review office. “I tried to be evenhanded in dealing with the controversial topic, letting editors express themselves but ensuring that the Review did not become a partisan voice.”14 Johnsson’s staff heard this often—the Review was independent and apart from all entities, including the General Conference. The publication was always to be neutral, because the Review may be required to be an impartial reporter. What Johnsson did not know then was how true that would become.
The nineties brought more changes. Experimenting with video content allowed for the launch of Online Edition, a 60-minute video format of the Review produced quarterly and sent to churches. It lasted two years, reaching about 4,000 churches.
Membership growth had skyrocketed, primarily overseas. In order to place a larger percentage of funds overseas, the GC created applied cost centers, placing the Review on a line-item budget. This cramped the style of the editor and his team. Any new initiatives related to marketing would now require fundraising. The editor, already not keen on marketing, added fundraising to his responsibilities.
Another change was the establishment of an Adventist Review Publishing Board. Robert Folkenberg, elected GC president in 1990, was a forward-looking, technically savvy individual who encouraged the Review to venture into other media platforms. The board came as a result of the unclear relationship between the GC and RHPA. As the GC exerted ownership, it felt a board could give overall guidance and management. The president was the chair, while the editor served as secretary. One of the first actions was to vote Johnsson as executive publisher. This was done under great protest by Johnsson, as he saw it as a conflict of interest. As executive publisher, he was to represent the interest of the GC in all aspects of the operation. But as editor, he firmly and consistently held to the belief that the paper should remain independent. The action carried; yet another decision that strongly impacted the course of the Review.15
Still worried about circulation, Johnsson awoke one morning with an idea. To work with Bill was to recognize this as a frequent occurrence. He woke early and took long walks or runs. It was then he seemed most creative, and it was not at all unusual later that morning for the staff to hear his latest idea. This one he thought so amazing he didn’t ask for counsel, but wrote directly to Folkenberg. “Let’s give readers choices, making each weekly a stand-alone,” he suggested. The members could subscribe to one, two, or three issues, while still receiving the NAD for free. Folkenberg gave his approval, but the staff needed major convincing. Eventually it led to the next complete redesign in 1996, resulting in four editions with unique faces: NAD, World, Cutting Edge, and AnchorPoints.
Perhaps the largest challenge came with the events surrounding the resignation of GC president Robert Folkenberg. It was sudden, and caused the Review staff to scrap planned layouts and replace them with breaking news.16 Here is where Johnsson’s two hats—editor and executive publisher—collided. “While the Review works closely with church leaders, it is not a public relations journal,” wrote Johnsson.17 The planned copy was shared with leadership, including Elder Folkenberg, but only for input. The March 11, 1999, issue carried the portrait of the new president, Jan Paulsen.
Carlos Medley launched the first Adventist Review website on September 30, 1999, completely funded by donors. Three years later, in August 2002, KidsView was launched as an Adventist Review product for children in grades 3 to 6 and sent to subscribers as well as students enrolled in an NAD elementary school.
As Johnsson looked toward retirement, he remained in the hunt for ways to increase circulation, although he recognized the Review was reaching members through other means. “Much had changed in structures—not in mission, but in ways to accomplish the mission,” he wrote.18 Soon he was to learn of a project that went beyond his wildest dreams.
1 Please note that I’m aware that this series is lagging behind the flag at the top [in print issue]. The history, at first, was nicely divided into about 15-year increments. It appeared to be a good plan, but research dictated much more to share. Part 11 should begin in 2007, but instead covers the years under William G. (Bill) Johnsson (1982-2006). Part 12 will catch up and conclude the history.
2 William G. Johnsson, The Fragmenting of Adventism (Boise, Idaho: Pacific Press Pub. Assn., 1995), p. 8.
3 William G. Johnsson, Embrace the Impossible (Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald Pub. Assn., 2008), p. 199.
4 Ibid., p. 198.
5 Ibid., p. 199.
6 Ibid., p. 196.
7 Ibid., pp. 200, 201.
8 Adventist Review, Oct. 17, 1985, p. 5; Oct. 31, 1985, p. 5.
9 Adventist Review, Oct. 31, 1985, p. 6.
10 Adventist Review, Jan. 2, 1986, p. 4.
11 Johnsson, Embrace the Impossible, p. 202.
12 Adventist Review, “The Review—Your Church Paper,” Sept. 19, 1991, p. 4.
13 Ibid.
14 Johnsson, Embrace the Impossible, p. 158.
15 Ibid., pp. 207, 208.
16 Adventist Review, Feb. 11, 1999; Feb. 18, 1999; Mar. 11, 1999.
17 Johnsson, Embrace the Impossible, pp. 174, 175.
18 Ibid., p. 195.