As for advertising, publisher Hugh Wiley said a trade campaign will break in The Wall Street Journal on Monday, with a mix of old and new covers. He acknowledged the tough ad environment for many business titles, including Fortune, which was down 18.6 percent in ad pages for 2007 through September, from the prior-year period, according to Publishers Information Bureau. But after spending a few weeks in Detroit recently, he is confident the beleaguered Big Three U.S. automakers will increase their ad budgets by single-digit percentages, if not more, in Fortune next year. BMW North America, which got wind of the magazine's redesign, is greatly increasing its inside cover ads and Dell is moving its ads from inside the magazine to the back cover, over several issues. Wiley added a large telecommunications firm has also just signed a $5 million ad deal that includes print and online coverage. "Would you bet against us next year? I wouldn't," Serwer said. — Amy Wicks

WE QUIT — FOR NOW: It looks like R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., home to the controversial Camel No. 9 ads that have run in several women's magazines, has decided to pull the plug on its print advertising next year. According to a report in the Winston-Salem Journal, the company will continue its cigarette marketing in other environments, such as direct mail and online. "This was a business decision, designed to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of our marketing programs," Jan Smith, a spokeswoman for Reynolds, told the company's hometown paper. A spokeswoman for Reynolds did not return calls for comment.

A representative for Rep. Lois Capps (D., Calif.) said that, regardless of R.J. Reynolds' current decision, the Democratic congresswoman will continue to put pressure on women's magazines because the tobacco company could decide to add print advertising at some future point. "Another letter will probably be sent out [to editors] next week," said the spokeswoman. — A.W.

BETTER LATE THAN NEVER: The December issue of Vanity Fair contains an unusual editor's note: It expresses regret that a 1995 book by Carol Polsgrove on Esquire in the Sixties wasn't cited as a source in a Vanity Fair article by Frank DiGiacomo — which ran in January.