Ah, rumor. Where would publishing be without it?
The lifeblood of our business was mightily fed last week by the news, first reported on the New York Times Web site, that Peter Olson would step down from his 10-year post as CEO of Random House. Quoting anonymous “executives,” the report revealed that Olson’s new Bertelsmann boss, Harmut Ostrowski, “has lost patience with [his] performance” and would soon install someone new. Never mind that these rumors had been swirling since at least the London Book Fair in April, when executives at other houses talked openly about it and speculated plenty about why Olson would be going (his bout with double pneumonia last year; his wife Candice Carpenter’s concern about same; Random’s lackluster performance) and who would replace him. (Random U.K. chairman Gail Rebuck was a front-runner in the rumor race; Chip Gibson, head of Random House’s high-flying children’s division, was also mentioned.) Many of the higher-ups at the American outpost of the world’s largest trade publisher were caught unawares by the Times report— one executive told me that neither Doubleday’s Steve Rubin nor Knopf’s Sonny Mehta knew anything about it until the rest of us did—and, by the way, no official Random House or Bertelsmann person has yet either confirmed or denied the report. (RH corporate spokesperson Stuart Applebaum reminded me that “Random House does not comment on personnel matters,” but then went on at some length about the many Bertelsmann events in which Olson participated this week.)
Privately, several senior executives expressed shock and worry about what such a change will mean, but no one seemed exactly surprised. (One person said that when he entered Olson’s office recently, he found him casually reading a magazine, not exactly characteristic of this usually hard-charging CEO.) Even discounting the exchange-rate problem (see p. 6), Random’s numbers have been only a little better than flat, and some divisions face more challenges than others, especially mass market.
And Olson was not exactly beloved by the rank and file, after his abrupt dismissal of Ann Godoff and his unfortunate comments to journalist Lynn Hirschberg in her 2003 New York Times Magazine profile about all the people he fired. While one respected longtime editor told me she thought Olson’s loss would be “bad for all of us,” most others said what they liked best about him was that he “left [them] alone.” (Until, of course, he didn’t: see Godoff.) As for successors, most seem to think that, as the Times speculated, it will be a Bertelsmann insider. Joerg Pfuhl (the “good German,” one editor called him) is the current front-runner.
But that’s where the rumors end, and the worry begins. Running Random House is a tough job, what with all those imprints that operate so independently. In this age of downsizing and consolidating, it’s hard to believe a new boss will let them all remain. And surely, people who have been closely allied with Olson and his policies must be worried for their jobs.
“Running Random House would be like trying to tame a monster,” one executive was heard to remark.
And that, dear reader, is no rumor. It’s a fact.
Agree? Disagree? Tell us at www.publishersweekly.com/saranelson
