Succession Planning: or, Who's Going to Do This When I'm Gone?

I try not to be a crabby-puss, but sometimes I wake up on the wrong side of the bed, the weather changes, it's a full moon, or whatever. Today is one of those days. And since I spent a couple of hours talking to publishers and editors about the prospects for freelance editors in the Atlantic region, my ire is now directed toward the publishing industry in general. Specifically the realization that there's no money in publishing; if you want to print something, print cash!

I'm sure this isn't a new realization for a number of people. It wasn't really an epiphany for myself, either. Rather, it was a growing realization that the state of publishing (especially among periodicals) in Canada is as dismal as suspected. Well, some people still get paid, but that number has declined. Why? The simplest reason is declining revenues for publishers. Without enough revenue, from advertising, book sales, and subscriptions, to cover the expenses of operations, publishers are forced to cut costs where they can. Typically the first place businesses look to cut costs is personnel, followed by products and services purchased, like freelance work.

In my case, the service publishers aren't buying is editorial: copy editing, proofreading, and substantive editing, to name the most common. Instead, publishers have turned inward, focusing on their own staff to meet their editorial needs. You can't really blame them, because, in fact, their reasoning is sound. Why spend money outside when you have the resources inside? I might be disappointed that there is a trend among publishers away from hiring freelance editors, but I'm not angry at the publishers. I'm more upset with the myopic foresight of the publishing industry as a whole.

There are a lost generation of professionals in a number of industries, professionals who should be in mid-career, but instead are still trying to find their place in their industry. This is true for academia, where there is a paucity of mid-career professors, but a significant number of new professors, working beside a glut of those ready to retire. The publishing industry, too, is facing the problem of retirement-age editors, master craftspeople, who's skills will be sorely missed. Unfortunately, the publishing industry doesn't have its succession planning in place, to replace those crafty wordsmiths with young, mentored editors. I'm sure some publishing houses and periodicals have thought about this, but on the whole, it seems there hasn't been the planning, or the money, to ensure the quality and character of the editor's craft continues.

At one time--not too long ago, I'm told--editors would work in-house for a decade or so before going freelance. Now, you're lucky if you can even get an in-house position, let alone make a living as a freelance editor, after a decade of experience or not. But what's lost isn't only the livelihood of freelance editors, but their skills, too. Without the same opportunities for training and experience, the current generation of editors sadly will be less versed in the editor's craft than their forbearers. Young editors don't have the same opportunities to work with manuscripts, authors, and senior editors, because the economics of the publishing industry dictate their working relationships. A young editor might wait a decade before having the opportunity to gain serious experience in substantive editing. And who's loss is that, really? The publishing industry as a whole.