Mobiledia.com is looking for a staff writer. Its ad on Mediabistro.com includes this mixed message:
"Our ideal candidate has also cursed at an editor and threatened to resign at least once because some idiot wanted to change his or her perfect lede."
But later in the ad: "We don't focus on output. Instead, we try to develop good writers. We believe if we can help you write better, everything else will fall into place. We'll challenge you to push yourself and grow, but we also offer support through coaching and mentorship."
Guess what: You can't have it both ways.
Showing posts with label Editor-writer relationship. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Editor-writer relationship. Show all posts
Monday, November 28, 2011
Monday, March 1, 2010
Attitude
I edited an article entitled, "English Bulletin Boards for the Classroom." The writer completely disregarded the rules about how to compose the text descriptions and URLs for the "References" and "Resources" sections which provide links for readers who want additional information.
I sent the article back to the writer to address the aforementioned issues.
The writer resubmitted the article without fixing anything and included this comment: "I taught 7th and 8th grade English for 9 years."
My comment to the writer in my rejection of the article, based on not responding to my request nor following the style guidelines, was: "'I taught 7th and 8th grade English for 9 years' does not respond to my request that you review the guidelines regarding References and Resources. . . . Describing a Reference as 'More ideas' leaves something to be desired in terms of piquing the reader's interest, as does 'Even more ideas' for the Resource."
The shoe's on the other foot now, Teach.
I sent the article back to the writer to address the aforementioned issues.
The writer resubmitted the article without fixing anything and included this comment: "I taught 7th and 8th grade English for 9 years."
My comment to the writer in my rejection of the article, based on not responding to my request nor following the style guidelines, was: "'I taught 7th and 8th grade English for 9 years' does not respond to my request that you review the guidelines regarding References and Resources. . . . Describing a Reference as 'More ideas' leaves something to be desired in terms of piquing the reader's interest, as does 'Even more ideas' for the Resource."
The shoe's on the other foot now, Teach.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Deep Questions
How many editors can dance on the head of a writer?
If an editor corrects a typo and no reader is aware that the typo ever existed, has the edit actually been made?
If an editor corrects a typo and no reader is aware that the typo ever existed, has the edit actually been made?
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Overheard at the Carets & Styx
A couple of days ago, I was at my favorite hangout, the devilishly fun café for editors, when I listened in on a conversation between two of my peers.
EDITOR 1: The writer I’m dealing with now is a real bitch. She’s insulting, patronizing, and never answers my queries.
EDITOR 2: You're preaching to the choir, honey. If we had a nickel, huh.
EDITOR 1: At the risk of sounding sexist, maybe she needs to get laid.
EDITOR 2: I need to get laid! But I digress. I'm making a note to myself on this. There has got to be a relationship between the sexual activity or inactivity of writers and how they relate to their editors.
EDITOR 1: Let's call Trish over at the Sosh Department to see if this has some research grant potential.
EDITOR 1: The writer I’m dealing with now is a real bitch. She’s insulting, patronizing, and never answers my queries.
EDITOR 2: You're preaching to the choir, honey. If we had a nickel, huh.
EDITOR 1: At the risk of sounding sexist, maybe she needs to get laid.
EDITOR 2: I need to get laid! But I digress. I'm making a note to myself on this. There has got to be a relationship between the sexual activity or inactivity of writers and how they relate to their editors.
EDITOR 1: Let's call Trish over at the Sosh Department to see if this has some research grant potential.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Don’t go to sleep edit angry.
Editors, when they’re working, can be a very angry bunch. With apologies to Alexander Pope, if we had a motto it could be, “To err is human, to forgive is out of the question.”
Whether it’s ignoring style manuals and publishing guidelines, and demonstrating that they’ve forgotten or are rejecting what they learned in English and writing classes, many authors really get our knickers in a twist.
The book I’m currently editing is filled with so much crap (nonsensical writing, seriously incomplete references, free-for-all capitalization and punctuation, end note numbers in text not matching end notes, etc.), I’ve been pissed off almost the entire time I’ve been at this edit—more than a month now, part time.
And, my, how my anger has affected my work. As I close in on the Wednesday deadline (appropriately falling on April Fools’ Day), I find more and more things I’ve missed, from the introduction straight through to the conclusion.
As far as I can recall, when I started my editing career back in the eighties I didn’t experience this anger phenomenon. It began perhaps a couple of years ago.
My inner, angry editor is actually uncharacteristic—I’ve grown more tolerant, of everything, as I’ve matured. To what, then, do I attribute this powerful reaction to author errors that earlier didn’t even cause a ripple? One word: BURNOUT.
Whether it’s ignoring style manuals and publishing guidelines, and demonstrating that they’ve forgotten or are rejecting what they learned in English and writing classes, many authors really get our knickers in a twist.
The book I’m currently editing is filled with so much crap (nonsensical writing, seriously incomplete references, free-for-all capitalization and punctuation, end note numbers in text not matching end notes, etc.), I’ve been pissed off almost the entire time I’ve been at this edit—more than a month now, part time.
And, my, how my anger has affected my work. As I close in on the Wednesday deadline (appropriately falling on April Fools’ Day), I find more and more things I’ve missed, from the introduction straight through to the conclusion.
As far as I can recall, when I started my editing career back in the eighties I didn’t experience this anger phenomenon. It began perhaps a couple of years ago.
My inner, angry editor is actually uncharacteristic—I’ve grown more tolerant, of everything, as I’ve matured. To what, then, do I attribute this powerful reaction to author errors that earlier didn’t even cause a ripple? One word: BURNOUT.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Lazy
I'm editing a new book by one of America's top intellectuals.
He has, among other things, founded a think tank; been a professor at Columbia, George Washington, and Harvard; served as a guest scholar at the Brookings Institution and a White House advisor; and published more than 20 books.
The book deals with many of the current geopolitical and sociopolitical issues faced by the United States, Europe, and the Middle East. While some of the material is new and was written for the book, the author to a large extent drew on his past writings.
As a result, the book is woefully out of date with regard to Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the global financial crisis, and the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign and election.
In addition, the rampant inconsistencies in style, and the structure of endnotes and references, suggests that the book was cobbled together by perhaps a grad student.
The author will not be pleased by the number of queries he will face when he receives the edited manuscript.
But when an author recycles past work and tries to rest on his laurels, the editor stands between him and the reading public who expect a book that reflects the author's expertise.
He has, among other things, founded a think tank; been a professor at Columbia, George Washington, and Harvard; served as a guest scholar at the Brookings Institution and a White House advisor; and published more than 20 books.
The book deals with many of the current geopolitical and sociopolitical issues faced by the United States, Europe, and the Middle East. While some of the material is new and was written for the book, the author to a large extent drew on his past writings.
As a result, the book is woefully out of date with regard to Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the global financial crisis, and the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign and election.
In addition, the rampant inconsistencies in style, and the structure of endnotes and references, suggests that the book was cobbled together by perhaps a grad student.
The author will not be pleased by the number of queries he will face when he receives the edited manuscript.
But when an author recycles past work and tries to rest on his laurels, the editor stands between him and the reading public who expect a book that reflects the author's expertise.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
