Follow Us

DMN on Feedburner
Connect with:
divider image

Bill Werde: I Was Never Fired from Billboard…

billboardlogo

And the ugly fallout at Billboard continues.

This time, former editor Bill Werde is clamoring that he wasn’t fired from Billboard after all, but was merely shifted to another ‘full-time’ position within the company.  Meanwhile, the post-shakeup Billboard is rallying behind a totally different editor, Janice Min, and trying to reshape the moribund publication with fresh blood and lots of new faces.

It’s unclear if Werde is playing any role whatsoever in that refresh, though it appears that he has been completely pushed aside, at least from the publication.  Back in January, Billboard heralded the arrival of Min in a lengthy article, while neglecting to even mention the dethroned Werde.  The New York Post subsequently reported that Billboard owner Guggenheim Partners was “removing” Werde “in a power play that clearly puts Janice Min in the driver’s seat”.

The New York Times also failed to even mention Werde in an in-depth piece about the transition, though Min was a core focus and interviewed for the article.  Billboard and its owner, Guggenheim Partners, obviously fed the Times for the pre-announcement piece.

Sources to Digital Music News have been consistent with that picture, pointing to a flat ‘firing’ of Werde from the editor’s chair, though it’s unclear why Werde is rattling this cage months after the shake-up.  Perhaps Werde himself is sprucing his resume for a new editor’s desk, and hoping to smooth some of the rough edges from earlier this year.

 

werderesponds

 

 

blue bar background graphic
Comments (10)
  1. Eric

    Naturally Bill wants people to think he wasn’t fired, but it’s pretty obvious he was.

    Has Janice asked him to edit any special issues or packages? Nope. Write anything? Nope. Is his name even on the masthead anymore? Not sure, but don’t think so.

    Has the magazine started to look a lot better since he left? Yup.

    Enjoy that “entrepreneurial role” buddy lol.


    Reply
  2. Randall

    Paul..

    Wow – I mean, man.. this IS a new bottom. Are you OK?


    Reply
  3. Former Billboardian

    Lordy Lordy. Bill Werde was indeed fired. As was Ross Levinsohn. Both of whom are such egotists and narcissists that either will go to great lengths to make people think they are working on “special entrepreneurial projects” that Guggenheim could never do without their brilliant minds. Like the previous commenter pointed out – Werde doesn’t even get a letter to the editor published these days, let alone some formal role within the group or even a mention on the mast head. When you go from managing a huge group of employees as an editor, with personal assistant to boot, to now working literally alone without one support person or even an office – that’s called being shit canned. All of which is sort of irrelevant as really no one reads billboard any longer.


    Reply
  4. News Minded

    Why don’t you ask actual sources at Guggenheim Partners instead of all this conjecturing? Are you an industry news site or not?


    Reply
    1. Nina Ulloa

      “Sources to Digital Music News have been consistent with that picture, pointing to a flat ‘firing’ of Werde from the editor’s chair”

      sounds pretty “news minded”….


      Reply
    2. Paul Resnikoff

      I think you’re forgetting that Bill Werde IS an ‘actual source at Guggenheim’. And there’s his comment.

      Your turn.


      Reply
  5. you news you lose

    this is how it works: bill w is, yup, an actual source at guggenheim. but since the entire point of your post is
    to suggest that he’s lying, you need to contact guggenheim itself to get its side of the story. no matter how many unnamed and undescribed “sources” you may have, you still have to put in a call to an actual official name and report what that say. that is what’s known in journalism terms as “the other side of the story.” the way you have it, the other side of the story is you.


    Reply
  6. Walsh

    This is such a lazy and dumb article, full of weak reporting and conjecture.

    If you wanted to know why Bill was “rattling the cage” why didn’t you ask him? (A Google search probably would have clued you in. Did you try that?). Why not check in with Guggenheim? Why not state your “sources” who have been “consistent” with their opinions on what happened? This entire post in a rehash of old news stories, conjecture and an email from Bill to you? (or did I miss something?) My point: What was the point of this? I’m actually annoyed that I stumbled across this while looking for something else because it was such a waste of time. (And as a side note – why would you publish that miserably-rendered image that’s leading this post? Do you even care what goes on on this site?)

    If you want to chat, I’m here: @chrismwalsh


    Reply

Leave a Reply

Connect with:


7 + = eleven

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

  1. OUR SPONSORS

  2.  
  3. Most Heated!