BoSacks Speaks Out: The Vanishing Trade Press—A Lost Chronicle of an Industry’s Evolution

For more than a decade, I’ve carried within me the intention to write an article—a reflection on the recent history of our industry, but through an academic lens.

It would not merely be an essay about nostalgia, but rather a contemplation of how the magazine industry’s priorities have evolved—how issues once deemed critical have faded into obscurity, rarely mentioned in today's trade press, if such a press even exists anymore.

And that phrase, “trade press,” is itself an understatement. While several trade organizations remain in the U.S., how many true trade publications are left standing? Once, they were abundant—alive with discussions on best practices, innovations, and industry foresight. Today, their absence speaks volumes about the transformation we have undergone.

About a decade ago, seeking tangible evidence of a different era in publishing, I reached out to my friend Tony Silber. I asked him to delve into the Folio: Magazine archives and retrieve some older issues from a time when the industry truly thrived. He kindly obliged, and soon I was holding a June 1, 1996 issue – 130 pages brimming with indispensable insights for magazine professionals. It was a vivid snapshot from a period when print wasn't just surviving but actively flourishing. Consider this essay a warm-up for the more in-depth article I fully intend to write… any day now.

The pages tell the story of an industry at its zenith, filled with advertising and supported by a robust infrastructure—printers, color separators, fulfillment houses, and even a full-page ad from the USPS (back when they apparently had the budget to advertise instead of just raising stamp prices). The industry wasn’t suffering from a lack of supportive organizations willing and able to advertise. It was vibrant, expansive, and well-resourced.

Within that issue were articles that encapsulated the pressing concerns of the time:

The strategic advantages of printing in Russia (because, apparently, printing had diplomatic strategies too).

Newsweek transitioning from Atex to Agile—a sign of the evolving technological landscape.

Folio's 1996 production salary survey

Travel Titles head for slowdown

Association Publishing is financially resourceful

Paper Market

Fulfillment

Reprints

Yet today, these discussions are absent from our professional conversations.

They are ghosts of another time, replaced by new anxieties about digital monetization, subscription models, and the delicate balance between print and digital sustainability.

Trade magazines, once the heartbeat of the publishing industry, were not lost due to dwindling interest but rather the contraction of the infrastructure that once sustained them. As printers, fulfillment houses, and key industry players disappeared, so too did the publications that served them.

The Disappearance of Paper as a Conversation Topic

One subject that used to dominate discussions among publishers was printing paper. If you were in the industry, paper wasn’t just paper—it was everything. The stock, weight, brightness—it could make or break a publication. And let’s not even get started on paper shortages, price hikes, and sustainability debates. Publishers once spent more time discussing paper than their actual content.

But somewhere along the way, paper fell off the radar. As digital publishing surged forward, the once-crucial conversations about stock choices, coated vs. uncoated finishes, and bulk pricing negotiations became relics of a bygone era. Yes, some publishers still print, and paper prices still fluctuate, but the urgency has diminished. Once, heated debates over paper were practically an Olympic sport; now, they’re more of a historical footnote.

Why did this happen? Maybe digital took center stage, pushing print into the background. Or maybe after years of talking about paper thickness, everyone just collectively decided they were exhausted and moved on. Either way, an essential part of publishing discussions simply faded into the ether.

The loss of these trade magazines and the conversations they nurtured is not just a logistical casualty—it is a crime against the historical record of publishing. Their disappearance has deprived future generations of magazine professionals of an invaluable resource—a guidebook to an era that, while now past, shaped the very foundations of the industry they enter today.

As we move forward, we must ask ourselves: what lessons are being lost? What narratives will never be recovered? And more importantly, how do we ensure that the history of this industry is preserved—not merely as a collection of fragmented memories but as a coherent and valuable blueprint for the publishers of tomorrow?