A friend has a small incorporated media company and is attempting to
lease a very small one room office.

The landlord of the multi-unit office building said that the
corporation renting the space MUST have slip and fall liability
insurance. No problemo--or so it seemed.

When shopping for insurance the brokers all asked what the business
does and after they are told that it is a media company the brokers
say that the underwriters decline.

When pressed they say something about them being afraid of being sued.
Based on the theory of deep pockets the underwriters allegedly fear
(or is it misunderstand) that even if the policy EXPRESSLY excludes
"professional liability insurance" they could still be drawn in by
aggressive litigants.
    
The jurisdiction is Ontario.  The corporation is a Canadian federal
corporation.  A tiny corporation.

The nature of a legal business should not be relevant unless of course
public safety (i.e. chemical plant ala. Bhopal) is involved.   But
come to think of it, even Union Carbide is able to get Office space
insurance in North America without the underwriters freaking out about
a remote site.
In other words, UC's chemical plants are not *inside or in close proximity"
to the office.

The underwriters rationale is not clear---the brokers are the go-between.
If it were possible to understand what their red flag is the
"unacceptable risk" could be factored out somehow.  A conspiracy
theorist might wonder if it is a way to limit the competition, so to
speak, to well-heeled corporate media.

I suggested to my friend that one option for him to consider is
incorporating a wholly owned subsidiary of the main entity. Put the
sub on the lease application.  Describe the subsidiary as a digital
data processing room.

Data walks in.  Data walks out.  No data harmed (or "published").
  
How do the beautiful people do it :)

This is really an insurance underwriting question, not a legal one.

You fail to state what kind of media company this is. I'm guessing
that you are talking about a recording company or the like. If so, the
insurer is quite concerned about the potential for violence that
recording artists bring with them when they visit the premises. I
can't say whether or not this is justified. But you only need to open
up the paper to see why an insurer would be concerned.

Tread very carefully in misleading the insurance company. An otherwise
valid claim may not be honored, if the policy has been wrongfully
procured. (In addition, a smart landlord will notice that the insured
under the policy is not his tenant.)

I don't know the Canadian market, but there must be companies willing
to insure media companies, perhaps at a premium price. If your friend
belongs to a trade group or is on friendly terms with a competitor, he
should be able to make inquiries.