So you wanna get into publishing? (I)
"How did you get into publishing and how do I pursue a career in that field?" As the cliché goes, I wish I had a nickel for every time I've heard that question.
So, lazy as I am, I thought I would write down an answer to the second part of the question (how I specifically got into publishing is too uninteresting to write about), so that next time I get an e-mail asking me for advice on the subject I simply send a link to this post.
There are different ways to get into publishing. Let's start with copy editor. In broad terms, copy editors are in charge of correcting the style and language of the articles we accept prior to publication, as well as making sure that the changes made by the authors when they review their proofs are correctly incorporated. As language is such an important part of the job, employers tend to prefer people whose first language is English. In the case of scientific journals, scientific training is definitely a plus. However, if you have a PhD or postdoctoral experience, this position may not be for you, as you may not find it particularly stimulating from the scientific point of view. Furthermore, employers may find you overqualified for the position.
If you want to stay in closer contact with the science, there are several options.
In journals that have professional editors, such as the Nature journals, titles from the Cell Press stable and Science, research editors read submissions and decide whether something is worth sending out for external review by experts in the field. For this job, a broad understanding of and interest in science is very important. It is also necessary to be able to express your ideas (scientific and otherwise) clearly. And crucially, you must have a very thick skin, as authors don't like it when you send them a rejection letter (which happens most of the time), and they can be very aggressive in their interactions with you. For this position, we normally hire people who have 4-5 years of postdoctoral experience, but there have been cases of people who join us after relatively brief postdocs.
Another class of professional editors are reviews editors, whose job is to think about review ideas, commission articles from suitable authors, developmentally edit the papers and organize the peer-review process. Scientifically, the requirements for the position are similar than those for research editors, although our company has sometimes hired people straight from their PhD with no post-doctoral experience. The reviews editor job can be construed as more creative than the job of a research editor -- you try to develop a useful review article, as opposed to trying to find what's wrong in someone's work as a reason to turn it down. Owing to your need to develop the articles you receive, your command of English and your attention to detail need to be very good, probably more than in the case of a research editor. At Nature Medicine we don't have a reviews editor, but we have a News & Views editor, whose job is similar to what I just described.
For both jobs, it's very useful to be socially skillful, as you need to develop good relationships with the community so that they agree to write review articles, act as referees and/or submit their research to your journal. Last, all of the above jobs (particularly copy editor) require you to have the ability to work to tight deadlines -- the journals need to come out on dates that have been established at least a year in advance, and these deadlines are rather firm.
In none of these jobs appeals to you, some publishing firms recruit other types of editors, which are variously referred to as managing editor, executive editor and so on. These people may or may not make scientific decisions on papers. Instead, they often act as liaisons between authors and the editorial board of the journal -- the scientists who ultimately decide what can be sent out to peer review and choose the referees. Depending on the journal, the managing editor may also be responsible for coordinating the production process of the publication, acting as manager of the copy editors and production staff, interact with the advertising and marketing departments, and other activities that don't necessarily require you to have a PhD. For this kind of position, in fact, it varies a lot whether your scientific background is relevant or not, although I'd say that, more often than not, it is relevant.
Last, but certainly not least, there are science journalists -- people who often work for a newspaper or other periodical, either as member of staff or as freelance writer, and whose job is to report on scientific advances for the readership of the publication. Some of these journalists have a very sophisticated understanding of science, whereas others are generalists who write about science the same way they write about politics or art -- in very broad terms for a very broad audience. The key issue here is that these people tend to be journalists, not scientists. In other words, you need a degree from journalism school to get one of these jobs. That said, if you want to be a freelance writer, you can get away without a journalism degree, provided you can write in a journalistic style. Some of the people who have written in the past for Nature Medicine's News section fall in this category of scientists turned journalists, but our News editor, who is responsible for choosing the stories we'll cover every month and for editing the work of our contributors, is a journalist by training.
In part II of these post, assuming there's interest and that my colleagues in the journal don't veto the idea, I'll tell you a bit about how we go about recruiting someone when there is an opening, in case you ever need to interview for one of these jobs.
