Getting Unstuck from the Editorial Mire

Publishing consultant Iva Cheung has posted her coverage of the panel discussion of project management at the recent national conference of the Northwest Independent Editors Guild. This point from Cheung’s write-up struck me as most important:

Sometimes we all find ourselves so mired that we feel we don’t have time to plan ahead or hire someone to help, but that attitude is self-defeating, said [panelist John] Marsh. “Take the time now, even if you are very pressed, to save time later on.”

Besides applying to project management, Marsh’s advice applies to several other facets of editorial work:

• We get attached to our slowpoke ways of doing things and tell ourselves that we don’t have time to learn faster ways, such as using macros and wildcard searches, using new-to-us software, and using Microsoft Word templates and styles. We wind up working far too many hours on a project and may lose money because our client won’t pay for time that wasn’t in the project budget.

• We get stuck working with clients who pay very low rates, rarely pay in a timely manner, are too demanding, and/or treat us shabbily in other ways. We tell ourselves that we don’t have time to look for better clients. We wind up with financial worries and decreased self-esteem.

• We work ridiculously long hours to finish a huge project, paying penalties of sleep deficits and poor mental and physical health. But if we take just a little time upfront and determine whether we can ask for an extended schedule or hire a subcontractor (or both), we might not end up frazzled or burned out.

• We mistakenly believe that marketing (1) is all about coming across as self-important, (2) requires a huge time investment and thus is intimidating or not doable, (3) is only for marketing experts, and/or (4) doesn’t really work for editorial professionals. Not surprisingly, not too many new clients will find us when we think like that . . . because they don’t know we exist.

Do make time to find ways out of the mire. Getting unstuck feels great, will keep burnout at bay, and will make your joy in your work evident to your clients—which will bring clients back to you for more projects.

Resources Discussing the Use of Singular "They"

Not being a linguist, I don't usually write posts detailing linguistic matters. This post is a reference list of good reading rounded up by my colleagues rather than a discussion of the use of the singular pronoun they. I am for the widespread use of they; the following items explain the issue much better than I can.

• "Dogma vs. Evidence: Singular They," from the blog Lingua Franca of the Chronicle of Higher Education

• "Everybody Has Their Own Opinion About the Singular They" [PDF from the former magazine Editorial Eye; note that there is a compilation of essays from the magazine available in book form, as Stet Again: More Tricks of the Trade for Publications People: Selections from the Editorial Eye]

• "Line 'Em Up, Knock 'Em Down," from John E. McIntyre's blog You Don't Say for the Baltimore Sun

• "Question from ACES2015: Is It Time to Accept ‘They’ as a Singular Pronoun?" from Pointer.org

• "Singular 'They' Is Old, Logical, and Grammatical," from the blog The Lousy Linguist

• "Singular They: The Pronoun That Came in from the Cold," from the journal Vocabula Review [For access, you must either obtain the article through interlibrary loan or purchase a subscription to Vocabula Review]

• "Spelling, Usage and the Singular 'They,' " from Visual Thesaurus

• Conscious Style Guide

• "They," from the blog Sesquiotica

• "They and the Gender-Neutral Pronoun Dilemma," from the blog Arrant Pedantry

• "The 'Singular They' Articles," compiled by Gael Spivak
  

Dear readers, if you have links that you think should be added here, please leave them in comments. Thank you.

Why Does Editing Take So Much Longer Than Reading for Pleasure or Interest?

Dear authors of articles for biomedical journals:

Editing is very unlike reading for pleasure or interest. It involves considering many issues. Here is a partial list of the issues that I address when editing your manuscript:

• Grammar
 
• Punctuation
 
• Spelling
 
• Syntax
 
• Good transition from one topic to another
 
• Overall topic organization
 
• Logic
 
• Accessibility:
• Did the author present enough information so that readers with various levels of expertise—longtime physician, nurse-practitioner, intern, medical student—can understand what is meant, or are there information gaps that should be explicitly addressed?
• Even though a specific abbreviation is already defined in the text, is it also defined in the caption for the figure where it is used, so that skimming readers don’t have to search the entire article to find out what the figure’s abbreviation means?
• Consistency (e.g., did the author use the abbreviation throughout, or did she use the full term sometimes and the abbreviation at other times?)
 
• Topic, figure, and table cross-references in text
 
• Verification of names of drugs, genera and species, and names of actual people, places, and organizations
 
• Appropriate citation of references
 
• Wordiness (getting rid of it)
 
• Jargon (making sure jargon is used appropriately—and that’s if it needs to be used at all)
 
• Bias-free writing:
• Sex
• Gender identification
• Parents versus nonparents
• Emotions (e.g., in research papers, using "killed the rats" instead of the emotion-laden "sacrificed the rats")
• Additional issues
• Style:
• Uppercase versus lowercase
• Standardizing references to follow AMA style
• Trademarks versus generic names
• Additional issues
• Presentation (What works best for reader comprehension here: straight text, a bulleted list versus a numbered list, a sidebar, a table, a figure?)
 
• Meta-issues (e.g., can I add an editorial comment referring readers to another article in the same issue or in a past issue that is about a topic related to the one covered in an article in the current issue?)

It takes time for your editor to address all of these issues and additional issues in helping you make your writing its very best, so please be patient. We editors are on your side.

How to Teach Yourself AMA Style

If you need to learn AMA style (AMA Manual of Style, 10th edition), you can check the websites of various editorial professional associations for courses on the topic. The American Medical Writers Association and the Editorial Freelancers Association, for example, periodically offer courses, workshops, and webinars on medical style.

But while you're waiting for courses to open up, you can cobble together your own program for learning AMA style:

• Buy a hardcover copy of the style manual and a subscription to the online version. There is an online form for ordering an individual subscription. Each day, spend 30 minutes to an hour studying a different portion of the manual until you've worked your way through it.
 
• Follow the advice in the handout "How to Learn a Style Guide in 10 Days" (a PDF) from the 2012 conference of the American Copy Editors Society.
 
• Bookmark the following sections of the manual, both in the hardcover and online:
 
• Proper usage: chapter 11
 
• Abbreviations for clinical, technical, and other common terms: chapter 11, section 14.11
 
• Units of measure: chapter 14, section 14.12
 
• Terminology for various medical specialties: chapter 15
 
• Reference lists: chapter 3
 
• Style for reference-list entries, within chapter 3:
 
• Regarding a journal article: section 3.11 (pages 47–52)
 
• Regarding printed books and chapters within them: section 3.12 (pages 52–56)
 
• Regarding newspaper articles: section 3.13.1 (page 57)
 
• Regarding government or agency bulletins: section 3.13.2 (pages 57–58)
 
• Regarding theses or dissertations: section 3.13.4 (pages 58–59)
 
• Regarding unpublished material: section 3.13.8 (pages 59–61)
 
• Regarding electronic media (such as online journals, websites, online conference proceedings, email list messages): section 3.15 (pages 63–72)

• Follow the blog AMA Style Insider.
 
• Take the many style quizzes available from the online version of the manual.
 
• Look at samples of AMA-style reference-list entries and citations. You can find additional samples via an online search, but check them against the manual itself to make sure they are valid.
 
• Take the inexpensive AMA style test, such as this one and this other one, offered by medical writer Emma Hitt Nichols. If you are subscribed to the HittList, which is a subscription email listing job opportunities for medical writers, watch for occasional announcements there of the availability of additional style tests for purchase.
 
• Purchase and listen to CDs from these audio conferences offered by Copyediting newsletter^*:
 
• "Common Problems in Medical Editing" (presenter: Katharine O'Moore-Klopf, self-employed medical editor and managing editor of the Journal of Urgent Care Medicine)
 
• "Common Problems in Science Editing" (presenter: Carolyn Joyce Brown, self-employed science and medical editor; formerly manager of the journals program for Research Press of the National Research Council of Canada)
 
• "Medical Copyediting: The Mechanics of Medical Editing"  (Daniel Sosnoski, editor-in-chief, Chiropractic Economics)
 
• "Medical Copyediting: Using the AMA Manual" (presenter: Stacy Christiansen, managing editor, JAMA)

_____________________
^*Note: After I wrote this post, Copyediting newsletter was redesigned after being sold to new owners. Thus, the links to the audio CDs given above no longer work. That may change as the site redesign continues. I will supply updated links for the CDs when they become available. This post was last updated on July 7, 2016.

When to Give It Away: Helping Writers Help Others

Sometimes we editors have the pleasure, after helping writers who create educational articles for people in service-related professions, of realizing that we have played a small part in making the world a better place. This is the story of one such case.

In June 2012, my colleague Laura Poole wrote a well-done and thorough guest post on my blog called "Copyediting Drug Names," dealing with trademarks, capitalization, and other usage points.

In March 2015, Sergeant William A. Doherty of the Floral Park Police Department, about 50 miles away from where I live on Long Island, wrote to me after finding Laura's post. He was writing an article for The New York State Chief's Chronicle, the journal of the New York State Chiefs of Police Association, and had questions about whether to use the "registered trademark" symbol (®) with drug names, about whether to include disclaimers stating that by mentioning drug brand names the Floral Park department wasn't necessarily endorsing the particular drugs, and whether and how to mention drug manufacturers' names.

Now, I earn income by editing, so I generally don't give away my services without charge. But I couldn't pass up the chance to help out a police sergeant who was reporting on patrol officers' use of a particular drug to help reverse opioid overdoses among people they encounter in emergency situations. So I answered his questions, and he turned in his article.

Now the article has been published (see this also), and Sergeant Doherty and the journal's editor have given me permission to share his article here.

His article will help other officers save lives. And the advice he obtained from Laura's blog post and from me helped ensure that the drug names used in his article were handled in a standardized way that is recognizable across professional disciplines. Sergeant Doherty, I salute you and your colleagues for the help you give to many citizens!

Spellism

Editors are detail people; we pay attention to the smallest parts of every manuscript. Thus, when my people get together in groups, sometimes they'll talk about their pet peeves regarding grammar, clichés, and spelling.

The longer I've been an editor, the less inclined I have become to engage in this airing of gripes. First, life's just too short to focus on irritants. Second, to me it smacks of intolerance for individual differences. The form of this peeving that bothers me the most is what I call "spellism." What is spellism? It's looking down on people who have difficulty spelling correctly.

Being a poor speller does not necessarily indicate low intelligence or a poor education. For example, my husband has always had difficulty spelling. So do our two sons, and so does my daughter from my first marriage. All of them are quite intelligent and have had (or are getting) good educations. Edward O'Moore-Klopf​, my husband, is a gifted cabinetmaker whose custom creations are lovely works of art. Neil​, our oldest son, is a talented apprentice cabinetmaker. Jared, our 13-year-old son, is a highly skilled gamer with an interest in history. He is an avid reader, is a budding leader, and has a wicked sense of humor. Rebecca Sanchez, my daughter, is an empathetic social worker who puts her heart into getting her clients the help that they need within confusing health-care, housing, and financial-aid systems. Should any of them think less of me because I am spatially dyslexic (my self-diagnosis), dislike gaming, or am not cut out to be a social worker?

Spellism doesn't do the reputation of editors any favors. Some people already see editors as hidebound rule followers, comma and hyphen freaks who are out to surgically remove authors' voices and make authors' works into our own because we're failed writers whose work can't find an audience on its own merits. So why engage in spellism? I think it's a tool for setting oneself apart from those "undesirable" others.

But my friend Martha Schueneman, an editor and writer, said today via a Facebook group and a private discussion, quoted here by permission:

This is one of my least favorite topics that comes up among editors. My ex is such a horrible speller that he frequently gets his name wrong. Give me someone who makes me laugh and is good at all the stuff I'm not good at—I'll discuss great books and parse grammar with colleagues, you know? Give me someone who's nice to a hotel maid and a waiter and who makes me laugh, and I'll put up with "between you and I." Even if it takes me a while to figure out what "ornches" [oranges] is on a grocery list.

So yes, if you're an editor, correct the spelling in documents you're paid to edit. But if you want to be seen as a scold and want to lose out on some potentially wonderful relationships, go ahead and make fun of those whose spelling is poor and reject them as unfit to be your friend or mate.

Letter to My Colleagues Who Want Referrals

Dear colleagues:

I am always happy to pass along your professional contact information when I post about a project opportunity in private Facebook groups for editors or via profession-related email discussion lists. [Please note that this post is not a request for you to send me such information right now.]

I worry about those of you who don't have links to places online where potential clients can find out all about you. I'm talking about a business website, LinkedIn profile, some other professional profile, or even a business-related blog. You don't need all of those items; most times, just one of them is enough.

Because potential clients don't want to be overwhelmed by lots of email attachments, I don't pass along your résumé or curriculum vitae. In fact, lots of corporate email systems automatically strip out email attachments. Thus, if you haven't provided links to any sites where people can learn about you, then giving just your name, phone number, and email address isn't going to get you many responses from potential clients.

Even if you can't afford to maintain a business website, please, please at least set up a free profile for yourself at LinkedIn or some other respected website. For example, editorial associations often allow their members to set up a personalized listing in the societies' online directories. Please take advantage of that service. It doesn't take much time to put together a profile, and it will help clients find you.

Respectfully,
Katharine

Learn About Medical Editing at the American Copy Editors Society Conference

What? You haven't signed up yet for the 2015 conference of the American Copy Editors Society in Pittsburgh? It's coming up March 26–28, and online registration closes Tuesday, March 10. So get cracking! Go here to register:

Betcha didn't realize that Friday, March 27, is practically Medical Editing Day at the conference. Look! Four separate sessions (see the blue arrows in the picture below) on various aspects of medical editing! And I'm leading the first session at 9 a.m.: "Avoiding Pitfalls in Medical Editing."

In my session, I'll focus on

• Conventions in medical editing

• Editing research reports versus materials for laypeople

• Coping with jargon

• Ensuring that language is patient-friendly

• Dealing with statistics

• Editing reference lists

• Preventing word pileups

• What sections of the AMA Manual of Style you must pay attention to

• Other reference works you'll need access to

• How to move into the niche of medical editing

• Where to find clients who need medical editing done

See you there!

American Copy Editors Society conference continuing education medical editing editing editor publishing EditorMom

Learn More About Medical Editing From Me This Spring

Listen up, you freelance editors who do medical editing or want to move into the field: I'll present "Avoiding Pitfalls in Medical Editing" at the March 2015 annual conference of the American Copy Editors Society in Pittsburgh!

Medical editing has its own special considerations and pitfalls. In my session, I'll focus on

• Editing conventions

• Research reports versus materials for laypeople

• Jargon

• Patient-friendly language

• Statistics

• Reference lists

• Word pileups

• Vital sections of the AMA Manual of Style

• Necessary reference works

I'll also give you tips on how to move into the niche of medical editing and where to find clients.

Sign up now for the conference before spaces run out!

American Copy Editors Society conference continuing education medical editing editing editor publishing EditorMom