Did Observer Benefit From Loose Lips?

At the New York Observer’s fifth-anniversary party in 1992, “60 Minutes” veteran Mike Wallace surveyed the 200 or so people gathered at the Century Assn.’s stately Midtown landmark and announced that it was nice to see all of the paper’s readers in one room.

Three years later, Wallace has become a paying subscriber, and there probably are fewer playful barbs aimed at the salmon-colored weekly with the 19th-Century layout. Last week, the Observer was the big winner at the National Magazine Awards, even though it was not among the nominees.

Citing “a combination of intuition and reporting,” the Observer had accurately predicted 13 of the 14 award winners before they were announced during the annual luncheon at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel. The paper’s lone error--the award for reporting went not to the New Yorker, but to the Atlantic Monthly--prompted winning editor William Whitworth to remark that “this should be the New York Observer Memorial Award.”

For the American Society of Magazine Editors, which sponsors what are considered the Oscars of the business, the Observer’s coup appeared to reflect an embarrassing case of loose lips among the 54 judges, a panel that includes some of the top names in the magazine trade.

For the 50,000-circulation Observer, batting 13-for-14 should help draw more publishing industry readers.

“I certainly don’t blame the Observer,” said Good Housekeeping Editor in Chief Ellen Levine, president of the society. “They were enterprising and we have a leaky ship. We are a very gossipy industry.”

Although the accounting firm of Price Waterhouse counted and sealed ballots for the first time in a bid to ensure secrecy, the judges could easily have foreseen the outcome of their votes from the tenor of discussions beforehand. As a result of the Observer’s piece, the magazine editors may tighten the judging procedures to avoid a repeat.

Marcia Clark, the Book: “Marcia Clark: Her Private Trials and Public Triumphs,” a biography of the O.J. Simpson prosecutor by Clifford Linedecker, is due in stores next week. The publisher, Pinnacle Books, was the first of three houses to release instant paperbacks on the Simpson case last summer. This time, it plans a printing of 250,000 copies.

Meanwhile, the May issue of Working Woman helps Clark solve her well-publicized money woes. First suggestion: Tackle the $23,500 in outstanding charges on three credit cards or at least consolidate the debt on a lower-rate card. At the rate Clark is now going--paying off $218 a month--an expert says it will take her 34 years to clear her debt.

Disney and Kids and Parents: When the Walt Disney Co. established Hyperion, its Manhattan-based publisher of general interest books, the new house explored how it could build on the Disney name with parents in mind.

Four years later, comes the answer: “The Disney Encyclopedia of Baby and Child Care,” a slipcased pair of books edited by four leading pediatricians under the direction of Genell Subak-Sharpe.

Volume I focuses on child development to age 6. Volume II deals with health concerns from acne to worms. The pair lists for $29.95.

According to publisher Robert Miller, Hyperion convened focus groups of parents and sounded out doctors as part of the editorial process.

“Physicians pointed to the gap between information on baby care and those who don’t get that information,” he said, suggesting that the Disney name alone might help bridge that gap. The discussions with parents prompted Hyperion to devise an easy-to-use format; the layout is airy and the illustrations colorful.

The first printing of 100,000 copies is high for a child-care reference, which stores usually shelve as an evergreen, so-called back-list title. However, Disney plans to trumpet Hyperion’s “Encyclopedia” in a multifaceted marketing campaign that includes segments on the Disney Channel, promotional trailers on Disney home videos and brochures in 1 million videocassettes of “The Lion King.”