Editing just means reading and looking for typos, right? Wrong. In a guest post on the blog of the Indian Copyeditors Forum, I lay out the steps I follow in editing medical-journal manuscripts.
If you follow additional steps or a different set of steps in your process, please share them in the comments so lots of editors can benefit.
Thursday, April 21, 2016
Saturday, October 31, 2015
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:
Besides applying to project management, Marsh’s advice applies to several other facets of editorial work:
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.
Monday, October 26, 2015
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
- "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]
- "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
Friday, October 09, 2015
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:
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.
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.
Tuesday, July 28, 2015
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:
*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.
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.
Sunday, July 05, 2015
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!
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!
Wednesday, July 01, 2015
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:
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.
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.
Thursday, May 07, 2015
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
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
Thursday, March 05, 2015
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
American Copy Editors Society conference continuing education medical editing editing editor publishing EditorMom
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
American Copy Editors Society conference continuing education medical editing editing editor publishing EditorMom
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
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
Sign up now for the conference before spaces run out!
American Copy Editors Society conference continuing education medical editing editing editor publishing EditorMom
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
Sign up now for the conference before spaces run out!
American Copy Editors Society conference continuing education medical editing editing editor publishing EditorMom
Wednesday, December 31, 2014
New Year's Resolution for Editorial Workers: Build a Better Network
If you're an editorial worker, one New Year's resolution that you might make is to build a better professional network. These tools and tips will help you:
Here's wishing all editorial workers an intellectually stimulating and financially rewarding 2015!
professional associations freelancer freelancing copyediting copyeditor EditorMom
- Check out the links on the Networking page of the Copyeditors' Knowledge Base. For all organizations included there, I've provided links to their website and to their Facebook page, LinkedIn group, and Twitter account where available. The organizations are from all around the world, not just the United States of America, and they are targeted at various editorial specialties. If you know of additional organizations that should be listed there, please send the appropriate links to me at editor@kokedit.com.
- The blog of Copyediting newsletter carried a post in September 2014 about professional associations for Canadian editors. You do not have to have a paid subscription to the newsletter to access the blog post.
- The Editors' Association of Canada has on its website a chart of Canadian associations that compares them on the basis of
- Services offered
- Amount of membership dues
- Membership requirements
- Organization publications and communications
- Organization marketing and job-search tools
- Legal and administrative activities
- Discounts offered to members
- Opportunities for professional development and education
- If you do have a paid subscription to Copyediting newsletter, read my column The Business of Copyediting in the April–May 2014 issue ("Why Join and Be Active in Professional Associations?" on page 1) for a rundown of how to make the most of your association memberships.
- What if you want to afford to join several professional associations? I am a member of the following associations:
- The Editorial Freelancers Association (EFA)
- The American Copy Editors Society (ACES)
- The American Medical Writers Association (AMWA), which counts medical editors among its members
- The Board of Editors in the Life Sciences (BELS)
- The Council of Science Editors (CSE)
I'm not wealthy, so how do I afford all of those membership dues? I signed up for each organization at a different time of year, so that the dues for all of them are not payable all at the same time. You can use the same trick to stay within your budget.
Here's wishing all editorial workers an intellectually stimulating and financially rewarding 2015!
professional associations freelancer freelancing copyediting copyeditor EditorMom
Friday, December 19, 2014
Making Lemonade Out of Lemons
This guest post was written by my colleague Carolyn Haley, a talented editor and author. She last wrote a post here in 2011. Today she provides helpful insights for editors who suspect a particular project needs more editorial work than the author or other client requested.
Most independent editors, somewhere over the course of their careers, find themselves stuck with a project that needs way more work than they were hired to do. Much angst and frustration usually result, and sometimes damaged client relations.
How to fix this is a two-part equation. The first part is actually the second part: how to avoid a rerun in the future. That boils down to learning what kind of editorial work you are best suited for and how to acquire it, along with learning how to see undesirable projects coming and heading them off at the pass. Such foresight takes experience, starting with savvy communication with your prospects, and performing sample edits before you accept a job.
The real first part is getting through a project already on your desk that has expanded—or exploded—and still ending up with a happy client. The internal conflict often arises from editorial integrity—in other words, the personal need, compounded by the professional drive, to “fix” a poorly written work that seems doomed to publishing failure.
What’s Good Enough?
It’s not always possible to recast the contract. In those cases, your choice comes down to adapting to the changed circumstances or bailing out.
Bailing out is rarely desirable, leaving coping the better plan. To do so, you must spend some time thinking about broader issues. For example, what does “fix” or “make it right” mean? And what guarantee is there that any two editorial professionals are going to have the same understanding of what “right” is?
Most editors are uncomfortable working with subpar writing, at least when we do not have control and/or the remuneration to compensate for the labor and stress. As editors we are charged with helping authors make their work the best it can be, but who gives us the authority to deem that it’s good enough—or isn’t?
Is it more important to protect authors from making fools of themselves, or to accept that other parties are the ultimate arbiters of what’s “good enough” and just provide the service requested?
Keeping Perspective
I had to resolve this in my conscience and business strategy early on. I make my living editing mainly slush-pile-quality material. Occasionally something excellent comes along, but for the most part I get work that needs developmental editing—if not a full rewrite—for which I’m hired only for copyediting. (Sometimes I can talk clients up a notch but that’s the exception, not the rule.)
Learning how to deal with this has been a painful challenge. It helps to remember that I write dreadful stuff, too, and know how hard it is to do even that, much less learn what’s needed to improve the work and make it sellable or comprehensible to other people.
Within that frame of reference, I am able to keep in mind that just because I think somebody’s work needs significant rewriting, not everyone else does. If the entire professional cadre of editors went to the library together and each chose one book we think is superb and another we think is awful, we would likely end up with a stack a mile high in each category with few or no overlaps.
Point is, it’s not our job to judge our clients’ work. It’s our job to help them make their work shine, and educate them as best we can without overdoing our investment of time and effort, disproportionate to our pay.
A Win–Win Option
So, when you get stuck with a crummy project, here’s one way to deal with it.
Don’t waste your breath telling authors they need to rewrite; give them an idea how to go about it. This comes from showing via your edits, and telling via your comments, along with providing helpful resources. (For book-length work, I start with recommending Dwight Swain’s Techniques of the Selling Writer, then work down a list.)
Focus on the mechanics—clarity, consistency, choreography, comprehension—and present your comments and queries from a reader’s point of view. The work’s quality will be judged by readers and any acquiring editors or contest judges; not your problem if it’s doomed to rejection. All you can do is improve its chances in a harsh world.
When the job is finished, thank the author for the chance to work with him or her and wish them success. If the author is happy and wants to thank you lavishly in the acknowledgments, and you don’t want to be associated with the work, politely decline. You need only say that your policy is to remain neutral and invisible, as an editor’s job is to support an author’s work, not share credit for it.
Then ask for referrals.
Unless you’re operating at the topmost tier of the publishing world, it’s likely you’ll go around again with the same issues sooner or later. Only by keeping your workflow vigorous do you have a chance of attracting the best authors and enjoying the best jobs. So instead of griping about the quality of your clients’ work, dive in and become their partner to elevate it to the next level.
____________________
Carolyn Haley operates DocuMania, a freelance editing, writing, and reviewing service based in rural Vermont. She works with a diverse mix of commercial, indie, and academic clients on their works for publication, as well as teaches novice authors and editors.
Where to find Carolyn: business ▪ LinkedIn profile ▪ books ▪ blog ▪ book reviews
authors professionalism reputation freelancing copyeditor copyediting editor editing publishing EditorMom
Most independent editors, somewhere over the course of their careers, find themselves stuck with a project that needs way more work than they were hired to do. Much angst and frustration usually result, and sometimes damaged client relations.
How to fix this is a two-part equation. The first part is actually the second part: how to avoid a rerun in the future. That boils down to learning what kind of editorial work you are best suited for and how to acquire it, along with learning how to see undesirable projects coming and heading them off at the pass. Such foresight takes experience, starting with savvy communication with your prospects, and performing sample edits before you accept a job.
The real first part is getting through a project already on your desk that has expanded—or exploded—and still ending up with a happy client. The internal conflict often arises from editorial integrity—in other words, the personal need, compounded by the professional drive, to “fix” a poorly written work that seems doomed to publishing failure.
What’s Good Enough?
It’s not always possible to recast the contract. In those cases, your choice comes down to adapting to the changed circumstances or bailing out.
Bailing out is rarely desirable, leaving coping the better plan. To do so, you must spend some time thinking about broader issues. For example, what does “fix” or “make it right” mean? And what guarantee is there that any two editorial professionals are going to have the same understanding of what “right” is?
Most editors are uncomfortable working with subpar writing, at least when we do not have control and/or the remuneration to compensate for the labor and stress. As editors we are charged with helping authors make their work the best it can be, but who gives us the authority to deem that it’s good enough—or isn’t?
Is it more important to protect authors from making fools of themselves, or to accept that other parties are the ultimate arbiters of what’s “good enough” and just provide the service requested?
Keeping Perspective
I had to resolve this in my conscience and business strategy early on. I make my living editing mainly slush-pile-quality material. Occasionally something excellent comes along, but for the most part I get work that needs developmental editing—if not a full rewrite—for which I’m hired only for copyediting. (Sometimes I can talk clients up a notch but that’s the exception, not the rule.)
Learning how to deal with this has been a painful challenge. It helps to remember that I write dreadful stuff, too, and know how hard it is to do even that, much less learn what’s needed to improve the work and make it sellable or comprehensible to other people.
Within that frame of reference, I am able to keep in mind that just because I think somebody’s work needs significant rewriting, not everyone else does. If the entire professional cadre of editors went to the library together and each chose one book we think is superb and another we think is awful, we would likely end up with a stack a mile high in each category with few or no overlaps.
Point is, it’s not our job to judge our clients’ work. It’s our job to help them make their work shine, and educate them as best we can without overdoing our investment of time and effort, disproportionate to our pay.
A Win–Win Option
So, when you get stuck with a crummy project, here’s one way to deal with it.
Don’t waste your breath telling authors they need to rewrite; give them an idea how to go about it. This comes from showing via your edits, and telling via your comments, along with providing helpful resources. (For book-length work, I start with recommending Dwight Swain’s Techniques of the Selling Writer, then work down a list.)
Focus on the mechanics—clarity, consistency, choreography, comprehension—and present your comments and queries from a reader’s point of view. The work’s quality will be judged by readers and any acquiring editors or contest judges; not your problem if it’s doomed to rejection. All you can do is improve its chances in a harsh world.
When the job is finished, thank the author for the chance to work with him or her and wish them success. If the author is happy and wants to thank you lavishly in the acknowledgments, and you don’t want to be associated with the work, politely decline. You need only say that your policy is to remain neutral and invisible, as an editor’s job is to support an author’s work, not share credit for it.
Then ask for referrals.
Unless you’re operating at the topmost tier of the publishing world, it’s likely you’ll go around again with the same issues sooner or later. Only by keeping your workflow vigorous do you have a chance of attracting the best authors and enjoying the best jobs. So instead of griping about the quality of your clients’ work, dive in and become their partner to elevate it to the next level.
____________________
Carolyn Haley operates DocuMania, a freelance editing, writing, and reviewing service based in rural Vermont. She works with a diverse mix of commercial, indie, and academic clients on their works for publication, as well as teaches novice authors and editors.
Where to find Carolyn: business ▪ LinkedIn profile ▪ books ▪ blog ▪ book reviews
authors professionalism reputation freelancing copyeditor copyediting editor editing publishing EditorMom
My Teacher in Freelancing
This is my son Neil, 20 years old today, who spent years teaching me how to be self-employed with a baby/toddler/child/young adult around. And he taught me so well that I was confident enough to have one more baby after him while I kept my business running.
parenting self-employment work–life balance freelancing copyeditor copyediting editor editing publishing EditorMom
Wednesday, December 17, 2014
Why and How to Build Good Author Relationships
As a group, we editors haven't always done a good job of making the case for the necessity of editors. One way we can do that is through building good author–editor relationships. In a guest post on the blog of the American Society of Business Publication Editors, I explain why and how to do so.
clients authors relationships copyeditor copyediting editor editing publishing EditorMom
clients authors relationships copyeditor copyediting editor editing publishing EditorMom
Wednesday, December 10, 2014
Managing Editor for the Journal of Urgent Care Medicine
I worked with Lee Resnick, MD, FAAFP, during 2013 and 2014 to produce the books Textbook of Urgent Care Medicine and Textbook of Urgent Care Management, and we developed an excellent working relationship. Because of that experience, I am excited now to start collaborating with Dr. Resnick (JUCM's editor-in-chief), Peter Murphy of the Braveheart Group (JUCM's publisher), the journal's editorial board, and its authors to help make the journal the best it can be.
I will still be operating as a self-employed editorial consultant doing business as KOK Edit.
managing editor Journal of Urgent Care Medicine medical publishing EditorMom
Thursday, October 02, 2014
Tips for Working with Authors Who Aren't Microsoft Word Experts
Before sending edited files to authors for review, I lock the files so that every change the authors make is tracked, using Word's Track Changes function. When I get the files back for review, I don't want to find out that the authors have made changes that I can't easily spot and review. (Yes, I can run Word's Compare function on my edited file and the file that the author reviewed but did not track. However, that function doesn't display the differences between documents in the way I can best process them. Your experience with Compare may be different.)
Also, I always send authors who are unfamiliar with the Track Changes function or with Word's comment balloons the following:
- A screen shot (an image file) of what an edited manuscript looks like with changes tracked and with comment balloons showing, so they'll know what they're supposed to be seeing on their screen
- This explanation for how I want them to review my editing:
The Track Changes function in Microsoft Word is turned on in your manuscript file to make it easy for me to tell which are your edits and comments and which are my edits and comments. You will not be able to use the Accept/Reject Changes function. This is to ensure that I can easily find your changes or comments to review them. If you do not agree with a particular edit, please delete it, and this will be tracked by Word. If text must be added, please insert it, and this will also be tracked by Word. Please place your answers to my queries at the end of the appropriate query.
- The link to the blog post "Deciphering a Redlined Manuscript"
- If the author is fairly computer savvy, the link to the article "How Does Track Changes in Microsoft Word Work?"
work tools editor–author_relationship Microsoft Word Track Changes comment balloons copyeditor copyediting editor editing publishing EditorMom
Tuesday, September 09, 2014
Writer-Responsible Versus Reader-Responsible Languages
The blog Language Log has a wonderful post on that discusses a major distinction in the mind-set of writers with different native languages: writer-responsible languages versus reader-responsible languages. This distinction is one that I had intuited after years of editing manuscripts for authors who are non-native English speakers from many different nations, but until now, I had not had terminology for it.
The post quotes this excerpt from the 2011 post "Who Is Responsible for the Message?" on the CAL Learning (Culture and Language Training for a Multicultural Workplace) blog by Lauren Supraner:
I can say with confidence, because of my work with authors from other nations, that Korean, Chinese, and Japanese are not the only reader-responsible languages. Reader versus writer responsibility is the element that causes my international authors the most difficulty in writing for US English-language biomedical journals, because they are asked to write in a style that they see as antagonizing readers:
clients ESL language differences copyeditor copyediting editor editing medical editing medical journals publishing EditorMom
The post quotes this excerpt from the 2011 post "Who Is Responsible for the Message?" on the CAL Learning (Culture and Language Training for a Multicultural Workplace) blog by Lauren Supraner:
English is a writer-responsible language. That means it is the responsibility of the writer to make sure the message is understood. Writing is clear, direct and unambiguous. Schools teach from early on the importance of structure, thesis statement and topic sentences when writing in English. A good writer assumes no or little background knowledge on the part of the reader.
Korean, Chinese, and Japanese are reader-responsible languages. That means the reader is responsible for deciphering the message, which is often not stated explicitly. For an American who is expecting direct and explicit information, this style can be very confusing.
Korean, Chinese, and Japanese are reader-responsible languages. That means the reader is responsible for deciphering the message, which is often not stated explicitly. For an American who is expecting direct and explicit information, this style can be very confusing.
I can say with confidence, because of my work with authors from other nations, that Korean, Chinese, and Japanese are not the only reader-responsible languages. Reader versus writer responsibility is the element that causes my international authors the most difficulty in writing for US English-language biomedical journals, because they are asked to write in a style that they see as antagonizing readers:
- It's rude because it's direct.
- It's rude because the writer doesn't take time to build a rapport with the reader.
- It's insulting because it assumes that readers don't know much about the subject matter and thus it entails explaining and defining material that intelligent, experienced readers likely already know.
- It's stiff because it requires many levels of parallel structure (such as parallel headings).
- It's unimaginative because writers are expected to avoid speculation about the meaning of their scientific findings.
- Most important is not explaining material that readers with advanced experience in the subject matter likely already know. This is seen as respectful of the reader's intelligence.
- Readers, being intelligent, are expected to read between the lines and interpret what they read.
- The writer uses a good deal of description.
- The writer tries to draw the reader into a discussion of the possibilities. This may involve expressing opinions rather than just reporting findings.
clients ESL language differences copyeditor copyediting editor editing medical editing medical journals publishing EditorMom
Monday, September 08, 2014
Perfect Bound: A Guide Through the Book-Publishing Process
Confession: I haven't read all of Perfect Bound: How to Navigate the Book Publishing Process Like a Pro yet. My paperback copy of it is shipping out to me now. So this isn't a book review, but I already know I want to use the book for two purposes:
I've worked in the publishing industry, both as an employee of publishers and as a self-employed editor, for 30 years. And things have changed a lot since I started out in 1984. I'm at the top of my game as an editor, polishing manuscripts until they sparkle the way their authors intended. But truly good editors know that to maintain their expertise, they must constantly take part in continuing education about their industry. What I've read of Perfect Bound so far has convinced me that it will be an excellent continuing-education tool. And I intend to recommend it to my authors, whether they plan to work through traditional publishers or to self-publish.
The book covers these topics:
continuing education publishing process how-to editor EditorMom
- To help my book authors understand what to expect
- To teach myself more about the current indie publishing processes
The book covers these topics:
- Choosing a publication route
- The acquisitions process
- Manuscript development
- Copyediting and query resolution
- Design and layout
- Proofreading, author review, and final revisions
- Printers, distributors, and e-book companies
- Marketing and publicity
Perfect Bound: How to Navigate the Book Publishing Process Like a Pro, by Katherine Pickett, from Hop On Publishing LLC. Available in two formats: paperback (9780991499113; US$12.99) and ePub (9780991499120; US$7.99); 240 pages.
continuing education publishing process how-to editor EditorMom
Friday, September 05, 2014
Make Your Own Video Tutorials to Remember Computer Skills
On the email list of the Editorial Freelancers Association, my colleague Martha Carlson-Bradley shared an excellent self-teaching and memory aid for editorial types. She has given me permission to share it here. It sounds to me like a good tool to use when we're learning new computer skills or want to be able to remember later how to perform a skill that we use only occasionally.
Note that iShowU is for use on the Macintosh. But an online search shows me that there are also several screen-capture tools available for the PC, including Wink.
work tools skills learning memory aids copyeditor copyediting editor editing publishing EditorMom
I've used iShowU to record myself using a new skill—sometimes right after watching a video tutorial, sometimes while someone kind is showing me how to do something. (iShowU records what's happening on my computer monitor and also records sound.) So I have a little video of myself going through all the steps, with my own commentary. I've also used iShowU to make little instruction videos for a friend. They're not finished or professional videos, but it's comforting to know that I have my own little set of instructions, especially for tasks I don't do very often and tend to forget.
Note that iShowU is for use on the Macintosh. But an online search shows me that there are also several screen-capture tools available for the PC, including Wink.
work tools skills learning memory aids copyeditor copyediting editor editing publishing EditorMom
Tuesday, September 02, 2014
Working Directly with Authors: Hand-Holding Required
Often when we editors work directly with authors instead of through publishers or other intermediaries, part of our job is hand-holding nervous writers. I just had to send this to a talented, kind, but apprehensive young physician-researcher whose journal manuscripts I edit:
My author wrote back:
Taking just a few additional minutes to compose a longer explanation for my author made things easier for me (I now have a calmer author to work with) and made it very clear to my author that he has an advocate during the sometimes confusing and worry-making publication process.
clients authors relationships copyeditor copyediting editor editing publishing EditorMom
Here is a secret:
Even if a manuscript differs in a few places from a journal's preferences, most journals will not reject the manuscript because of that. But I have found that if we try our best to follow a journal's preferences, then the reviewers will focus on the ideas and research in the paper and not get distracted by little details such as whether an amount should be a word versus a number. No journal will expect that an author has perfectly followed the journal's minor preferences.
However, some journals will return a manuscript if authors don't follow their major preferences, such as preferences for reference citation (e.g., chronological order versus alphabetical order), for types of headings (e.g., "Materials and Methods"), for type of abstract (e.g., a single paragraph versus several short paragraphs, each with a mini heading), and for blinded versus unblinded manuscripts.
End of secret.
I will always do my best to make sure that your papers follow all of the major preferences (i.e., the preferences noted in the instructions to authors) and as many of the minor preferences as possible. Note that journals' author instructions don't often explain these minor preferences. But I figure out what their minor preferences are by studying articles that they have recently published.
What I am trying to say is this: You can relax because you are in good hands. I have been an editor for 30 years now. I am here to help guide your manuscript through the turbulent waters of manuscript submission. But because I know how important publication is for your career, I completely understand why you worry.
Even if a manuscript differs in a few places from a journal's preferences, most journals will not reject the manuscript because of that. But I have found that if we try our best to follow a journal's preferences, then the reviewers will focus on the ideas and research in the paper and not get distracted by little details such as whether an amount should be a word versus a number. No journal will expect that an author has perfectly followed the journal's minor preferences.
However, some journals will return a manuscript if authors don't follow their major preferences, such as preferences for reference citation (e.g., chronological order versus alphabetical order), for types of headings (e.g., "Materials and Methods"), for type of abstract (e.g., a single paragraph versus several short paragraphs, each with a mini heading), and for blinded versus unblinded manuscripts.
End of secret.
I will always do my best to make sure that your papers follow all of the major preferences (i.e., the preferences noted in the instructions to authors) and as many of the minor preferences as possible. Note that journals' author instructions don't often explain these minor preferences. But I figure out what their minor preferences are by studying articles that they have recently published.
What I am trying to say is this: You can relax because you are in good hands. I have been an editor for 30 years now. I am here to help guide your manuscript through the turbulent waters of manuscript submission. But because I know how important publication is for your career, I completely understand why you worry.
My author wrote back:
Thank you for your kind reply. I feel refreshed.
Thank you [also] for your useful ... secret. ... I learned a lot. In the future also, please teach me [the] knack and pitfall[s] [of] writing [in] English ... in addition to editing my manuscript. ^_^
Always I am counting on you! I appreciate your continued support and encouragement.
Thank you [also] for your useful ... secret. ... I learned a lot. In the future also, please teach me [the] knack and pitfall[s] [of] writing [in] English ... in addition to editing my manuscript. ^_^
Always I am counting on you! I appreciate your continued support and encouragement.
Taking just a few additional minutes to compose a longer explanation for my author made things easier for me (I now have a calmer author to work with) and made it very clear to my author that he has an advocate during the sometimes confusing and worry-making publication process.
clients authors relationships copyeditor copyediting editor editing publishing EditorMom
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
