A man who thinks pink

Andrew Gowers, the Financial Times' new editor, waves aside worries of a recession and tells Roy Greenslade that the paper has a rosy future

The world's economic outlook may be gloomy. The media world's destiny may hang in the balance. But the new editor of the newspaper wedded to the fate of the global markets isn't suffering from recessionary nightmares.

Instead, as Andrew Gowers settles into his Financial Times chair for the first time today, he is consoling himself with an optimistic lesson from history. "I'm not as disturbed by the present alarums as some people," he says, recalling that his predecessor, Richard Lambert, took over on January 1 1991.

"Seventeen days later bombs were dropping on Baghdad, the world-wide recession deepened and we went on a bumpy ride. Yet the FT emerged from that period stronger and fitter than ever before.

"Now, in comparison with 1991, we're infinitely better equipped than we were then to see out a recession."

It's understandable that a new editor should see the future in positive terms, but note also the reference to Lambert's success and the use of the pronoun "we".

A change of FT editor isn't a revolutionary act, but a matter of evolution. There is no blood on the carpet at the paper's Southwark Bridge offices. Lambert speaks highly of Gowers and Gowers speaks highly of Lambert. Sincerity shines through the many kindly comments Gowers makes about Lambert's achievements. It's as if one club president is handing over to another.

Gowers is the fifth editor in half a century and, at 43, is the youngest since Sir Gordon Newton in 1949. Just like those before him, he has been promoted to the top job after being imbued with the customs and traditions of the FT. He has spent 18 years with the paper in a variety of posts since starting in the foreign department.

Most notably, he stood in as acting editor for 12 months when Lambert went off to New York in 1997 to mastermind the FT's US edition. After Lambert returned, Gowers was given the task of launching the German edition, Financial Times Deutschland, in Hamburg. From a standing start, he managed to hire 150 journalists and then build a circulation which, at the latest count, has reached 76,000.

Despite there being other well-qualified candidates for the FT editorship, it was hardly a surprise that Gowers was chosen by Marjorie Scardino, chief executive of Pearson, the conglomerate which owns the FT. She can be certain that Gowers has both the journalistic and management skills for the job.

His first appointments have been interesting. He has promoted John Ridding from managing editor to be his deputy, a decision made easier by the desire of the more likely candidate, Peter Martin, head of internet operations, to move back to writing.

Martin's replacement to run FT.com - along with the title of assistant editor - is Chrystia Freeland, a woman for whom many predict great things. At 32, she is returning to the FT after a spell as deputy editor of the Toronto Globe & Mail. Freeland, who is of Canadian/Ukrainian origin, previously excelled as the FT's news editor and, says Gowers, was Moscow bureau chief "at a ridiculously young age. She is a very, very talented journalist with strong, crunchy management experience."

Her appointment is a sign of the FT's continuing commitment to on-line journalism and its determination to integrate paper and website. Gowers says: "I start from the strong prejudice that a newspaper, in particular an international newspaper, can't survive and prosper without a world-class website.

"But I also believe that a website can't exist in isolation without a counterpart in the analogue world, whether in print or broadcasting. They complement each other, doing different things. It's a mistake to treat web and paper assets as separate. They simultaneously strengthen each other."

Given that some estimates put the losses of FT.com at somewhere near £113m, this may look like a leap of faith. But there is clear evidence that the losses have fallen dramatically of late and Pearson remains wedded to its online strategy despite scepticism from other newspaper groups.

Gowers is also keen to break down the distinction between journalists who write for the paper and those who write for the web. He says: "It's artificial and we are reaching the point when it will be meaningless."

The FT's other priority is to go on expanding abroad, to imitate what he achieved in Germany by launching editions in other languages. "We know we have found a formula that is winning," says Gowers. It's no secret that Pearson sees Asia as the next stop on its global tour, though the current dramas may delay plans. It's difficult to know if the doom-laden forecasts of a further downturn in advertising revenue will come true.

Meanwhile, his recent trip to the US has convinced Gowers that there is "masses more growth to be had there". He speaks in glowing terms of the FT's "greater visibility" evidenced by "greater access" to decision-makers and opinion-formers. "The position of the paper has been transformed," he says. "What we've achieved justifies us in spades in going into the US market."

Ah yes, but what of the British market which accounts for only 34% of the FT's total circulation? Sales last month were some 10,000 fewer than August last year. While conceding that there was a concern about sagging UK sales a couple of years ago, Gowers believes that the paper is largely back on track and attributes current doldrums to the close relationship between FT circulation and the state of the stock market.

While he is "not content" with any slide in British sales, he quickly returns to his substantive point. "Looking at the big picture, our potential is substantially greater around the world. I wasn't at all disheartened when, in 1998, we reached the point where we sold more outside our home country than we did in it. I was delighted. No paper anywhere else in the rest of world has ever achieved that feat."

Not unnaturally, he takes a sideswipe at the FT's only real competitor, the Wall Street Journal, which bestrides the American market but has found it much more difficult than the FT to build audiences around the globe. "Remember, we are one newspaper with regional variants which sets us apart from the WSJ, which has launched different papers in other territories."

Surely though, despite the upbeat appraisal, there are problems in the short term if advertising goes on declining? For instance, can the FT sustain those two Saturday magazines: How To Spend It and The Business? Gowers says the former, which tends to feature the kind of kitchens no one can afford, has been profitable from the first issue. As for The Business, "it reaches out to new readers and I love it".

Then there is the Tuesday supplement, Creative Business, which seems to have an impossibly wide remit - anything from broadcasting to architecture - and has failed to attract advertising. Gowers offers the kind of answer all journalists want to hear (and all ad managers loathe): "I've never seen that section as needing to justify its existence as an ad vehicle. It's reaching into new subject areas and building up credibility." Ironically, one place where it is supposedly well read is among the very ad agencies who aren't placing their ads in it.

Turning to the paper's economic and political stance, Lambert's departure has prompted one consistent FT critic, Sun editor David Yelland, to wonder if it might herald a new attitude towards the European single currency. He may take heart from Gowers' careful response.

"My German experience has enabled me to see why the euro is necessary for continental Europe and why it will succeed. But exactly how Britain goes about it is another matter. I've become apprised of the difficulties Britain faces in adopting the euro."

That may not amount to a sea change in the FT's position, but it does suggest that the new editor is testing the wind. And the Sun.

Today's best video

Today in pictures