Sara Nelson, the editor in chief of Publishers Weekly, the main trade magazine to the book industry, has been laid off in a restructuring by the publication’s parent company, Reed Business Information.
Ms. Nelson, 52, spent four years heading up the magazine and had become a lively presence within the industry, speaking frequently on panels and advocating forcefully for books in her weekly column.
According to a statement from Reed Business Information, the layoffs affect about 7 percent of the staff. Reed operates a broad range of a broad range of trade magazines. In publishing, the company owns School Library Journal, Library Journal and Criticas. As a result of the restructuring, Brian Kenney, editor in chief of School Library Journal, will now be editorial director of that magazine along with Publishers Weekly and Library Journal.
Like the industry it covers, Publishers Weekly has suffered from a downturn in the retail economy as publishers have stopped advertising their upcoming books in the magazine. In past years, publishers used the magazine as a way to inform booksellers of the buzz on upcoming titles, but now most publishers communicate directly with bookstores and executives at the biggest book chains.
Ms. Nelson, who was previously a publishing columnist for The New York Post and worked at The New York Observer and a now-defunct Web site, inside.com, is also the author of “So Many Books, So Little Time: A Year of Passionate Reading.”
Ms. Nelson said in an interview: “I feel like it was a great run and I am very proud of the changes that my staff and I have made. I am sorry that the magazine and I are parting ways.”
From 1 to 25 of 34 Comments
Wow, this is a big loss for readers. Hey book readers, are you still out there?
— ENMWhat a ridiculous decision, made by people who clearly care nothing about books. Sara Nelson turned Publishers Weekly around! Reed Business Information should be ashamed of itself.
— EACThis is a sad day in Publishers Weekly’s history. Sara Nelson pulled Publishers Weekly into the 21st century with grace, verve, and panache. And I’ve never met such a loud cheerleader for books and for the book publishing industry. She will be missed by all who’ve seen her in action these past four years.
— Sara Fan/PW ReaderSara FanSara Nelson wasn’t the only one laid off. Several others were too, including Daisy Maryles, who has been a fixture at PW for over forty years. It’s an outrage.
— SmithVery sorry to see her go. To me, she has become Publishers Weekly.
– A nervous subscriber
— Barry AdlerAn unbelievablly bad decision.
— NickWith Sara Nelson’s weekly column gone, I think RBI has effectively sunk the magazine’s future. It’s becoming obsolete anyways.
I recall one of her columns speculating what might become of all the people in the industry who have been laid off. Well, their ranks have one more talented insider. It won’t appear in the same medium, but if she so desires Sara Nelson will have a hand in the industry for years.
— Frascombe BankSuch nonsense being spouted in these comments….
Speaking as a long-time member of the publishing industry, PW ceased to be relevant, important, or even interesting years ago (for the last several years, most editors and agents I know haven’t bothered to give it more than a very occasional and cursory glance), and Sara Nelson did nothing to turn it around. Publishers stopped advertising in PW because there was ZERO return on investment.The big accounts (who now generate the vast majority of sales) don’t read PW to get the scoop on what publishers are planning so why pay to advertise to gain the attention of the few remaining independent bookstores, when you’ll never recoup the cost of the ad in increased sales?
Nelson was an industry joke, as indeed is the whole magazine, which was outpaced many years ago by PublishersMarketplace.com as the primary source for industry news and information. I’m sorry for the few remaining fans out there, but the publishing industry (which is, after all, ostensibly the audience for this trade rag) wouldn’t even notice if the magazine stopped publishing tomorrow.
— what magazine?This stinks. Nelson was an outstanding advocate for books and reading and also wrote an interesting column every week in PW.
I read her So Many Books, So Little Time. I hope she writes more books now.
As for PW, that magazine seems to be sinking. I’ve subscribed to PW for years but am tempted not to renew when my renewal comes due in the spring.
— LindaSorry to hear mgmt shooed her out the door — typical corporate myopia. Given the industry’s downsizing, I suppose if Sara writes a sequel, she can call it. “Not So Many Books, Plenty of Time.”
— Harris HillWhile I agree that PW was completely out of touch, the one person who seemed to get it was Sara. Sorry to see her go, but excited that she will have the possibility to do more with her talent.
— jodyTo What Magazine,
Even though you are a “long-time member of the publishing industry” you should avoid speaking for others. I’m guessing you work in some ancillary department. Or perhaps you are a freelancer. Or perhaps Sara Nelson once was mean to you in high school.
In the publishing company I work for we all read PW; Sara Nelson had a great persective on the industry and she was often quoted (as the voice of reason) in articles in other periodicals. It really is a shock and a shame that she was let go.
— sparkyHi sparky, no, actually I’m a senior editor at one of the major houses.
Sara’s perspective alone–which in any event I found more often risible than “great”–hardly makes a magazine worth buying, and more importantly, advertising in, and PW offered very little else. What do you read it for? Industry news? It was long ago superseded by a combination of Pub Lunch and PW Daily so that no actual industry news has been broken in the print magazine for years. Bestseller lists? Also easily available and rarely relevant. Reviews? My publicity dept circulates the PW reviews of our books, which are occasionally useful, but again, it’s been years since a starred review in PW was a crucial buzz generator for a new book. Blogs long ago usurped that function and now the PW reviews just serve as back-cover blurb copy. Oh, everyone at my house subscribes to it for the sake of appearances, but I’ve noticed that it languishes ignored in in-boxes week after week….
— what magazine?Effective immediately, the entire book-publishing industry will be converted to an avatar-based Internet game. Players will be free to barter or swap their unlimited return credits for all kinds of virtual merchandise, non-existent employment opportunities, ersatz promotions, expense-accounted lunches, and even sexual favors. The object of the game is to eliminate as many as your competitors in as short a time as possible through vicious gossip, byzantine corporate reorgs and downsizings, and character assassinations. The last two competitiors standing will face off over lunch in a web-enhanced facsimile of the cloak room at Michael’s restaurant.
— DantonSorry to see Sara go. Her column was the one thing I read. Don’t understand the decision. Yes, publishing is changing, the old era is passing away, a new era of publishing will emerge in its place. I hope people like Sara come out on top—in all ways.
— Diane EbleWhat a gutless wonder you are, Mr. or Ms. “what magazine?”, to post such vicious, shortsighted nonsense and not have the intergrity to attach your name. I’d say your “major house” is minor just by your affiliation with it. Your day will come, and, judging by your personality, sooner rather than later.
Sara, Daisy, you fought the good fight and have brought tons of illumination to this business. I’m sure you’ll flourish in the future.
Carlin Romano
— Carlin RomanoThe Philadelphia Inquirer
Hmmm….Big company needs to re-organize three publications into one division; the three publications all have editors. No-name editor from less-important magazine chosen over the closest thing to a household name in book publishing. Oh, he’s a guy. Now I understand how RBI makes its decisions.
— RBI and WomenI’m also sad to see Sara go. She wrote with humor, grace, and insight, and so even if the magazine isn’t as important as it once was, I’m not sure what the great reason for “what magazine’s” bile is. But who cares. Ego and pomposity “is what it is.” Best of luck to Sara in whatever avenue she pursues.
— TomTo “what magazine?”
— Yesh PrabhuPerhaps in the next round of industry-wide lay off when you are laid off - it will be sooner than you think (I am psychic!) - you will have plenty of time to think, and you will have a different perspective.
I used to read PW on line, and I always found interesting, entertaining, and enlightening information in the magazine: about new contracts, authors’ agents, book tours, publicity, new writers, etc. Unpublished writers often derive encouragement reading about the contracts signed for huge sums. I know I used to marvel about the lucky writers who found famous literary agents willing to represent them.
Sara Nelson has earned very good reputation, and at PW she was without a doubt a star. She was laid off only to save money, I think.
as insider to the business, you all have it wrong, PW will be stronger with these changes
— PW ReaderAfter every great forest fire it always bring forth new life, for those that survive this period they will become stronger, the weak will die and when the fire is over the publishing industry will still exist but in a much different form.
— Kristi KomoroffWow, her column is always the first one I turn to when I get the magazine. I’m so sad to see her go. She was the face of PW to me.
— Colleen CobleSara Nelson and Jane Friedman both belong where they are: out of the business. Neither were visionaries, leaders or good managers. Neither understood the book business and both were entitled and grandiose. They spent most of their time gossiping about the real winners in the business and they PREVENTED innovation. The reason the publishing business is in the toilet is because people like Sara Nelson and Jane Friedman didn’t have a clue about how to move it forward. PW was an industry joke. Sara and Jane were industry jokes. These two were hell bent on destroying innovation. Jane Friedman killed the goose that laid the golden egg—Judith Regan –and Sara tried to roast her.
— Jeff GanderNow they have each other for consolation.
For me, the sign that PW had gone way past its prime was its monthly features on “30 under 40″–30 notable people in the publishing industry under 40 years old–which it ran last year. I think the feature was meant to make the magazine look young and hip, but ended up making the industry look old and decrepit. Most of the people PW choose were in the 35-39 age range, and one or two even were 40. Few seemed like innovators. Sadly, other websites that are edging PW out of its market aside, I think that PW is so caught up in their antiquated business model that they can’t even really see where the publishing industry is going, much less craft a vision for what it should be.
I have no strong opinion about Sara Nelson in particular, but the magazine is definitely out of date. It often reads like one big advertisement (they regularly sell their cover for ad space, except for when they can’t find buyers) and the “news” is both unfocused and a week too old. If PW doesn’t come up with a new business model soon, Sara Nelson will be a symbol of more to come for them, I fear.
— MichaelI hope that the departure of Sara Nelson will not mean further squeezing of content. Already there is little in PW beyond the weekly book reviews and the bestseller lists. The magazine would increase its appeal if it included more news, interviews, profiles, etc.
— Bill Williams