Editorial Liberties
July 10, 2007 by Deb
Filed under Freelance Writing
I have an editor who loves to make changes! This gig is fairly new and pays very well but I’m not sure what to make of my her. She makes changes to just about every post without discussing it with me, and sometimes they can be a little silly.
Maybe it’s my ego. As a blogger, I never have editors come by and change my work. Most know bloggers can write freely, as long as they don’t cross a particular line. Bloggers don’t follow the same guidelines as regular writers. In fact, I’ve never had an occasion when one of my blogging clients asked me to change anything at all. I don’t think I’ve ever, as a professional blogger, been so micromanaged. It’s very unsettling.
I also think this editor is used to editing articles, not blogs, and there’s a big difference between the two. She’s big on her bloggers injecting their personality and voice, but how can we do so when she’s editing everything we write?
I wonder, how can I write enthusiastically when I know she’s going to come by and add her own paragraphs to my post or that she’ll change the title or move things around. Almost everything I learned about blogging is being thrown out the window. It’s a little off-putting.
I realize I’m only the hired help and I need to suck it up and do what I’m being paid for, especially since the pay is so decent. I’m just wondering, how do others handle a micromanaging editor? What do you do when your editor changes words and paragraphs at random or injects her own input, turning your piece into something completely different?
It helps to actually be an editor.
I’m an editor for a living, and we make changes for all kinds of reasons–fit, format, voice, personal style, our boss is making us, etc. But I once wrote a short story that got published and the editors hacked half of it out! I was so hurt… but then I remembered that I do that, too. It’s just part of the biz. BUT, I do encourage you to tell the editor when you really like something and want it to stay. I’ve done that–gone to bat for some of my words–and often they will keep them if you insist and give a reason why. Speak up if you disagree and see how the editor reacts. But if you have a snarky, evil editor, sometimes there is, sadly, nothing you can do. Good luck!! 
Deb:
Just a quick question… are you ghostwriting the blog or writing under your name?
I know many of my ghostwritten pieces (articles, web content, et cetera) are changed with far more frequency than those for which I get a byline.
Of course, that doesn’t answer your post. Just brings up more questions. : )
Discuss it with her. And, if it wasn’t already in the contract, add language saying that the edits need to be discussed before posting.
That doesn’t mean the edits won’t go in as she wants them to — but it gives you the chance to discuss and debate the points.
A good editor is a wonderful thing; an editor who rewrites as piece “as she would have written it” without allowing your voice to come through can be a problem.
As Angelique pointed out, if it’s ghostwritten, however, it may have already established a voice that you need to mimic, but that should have been discussed in your contract.
Let us know how it goes, okay?
I just dealt with this problem in the past few weeks. I had had this particular gig for the past year and got a new editor while I was on vacation. From the very first piece I wrote, she was questioning everything I did. This was for an entertainment website, and the particular piece was a TV recap. She debated with me in emails for 24 hours whether it should be past or present tense.
I emailed the CEO and asked what he would like me to do and he replied he would like me to work it out with the new editor. I started over with her and handled it like it was a new job interview, instead of being in an existing situation.
I thought we were working it out, and then I was put on a strict schedule. Again, I thought we were working through everything when she picked apart all my subsequent articles or didn’t use them. Everything was edited out of my style and into hers. To me, with an entertainment piece, it should match the tone of what you’re writing about. If you’re reviewing an action movie, the piece should be full of excitement, and not glib one-liners. All of my commas were taken out and the sentences changed to simple sentences or dashes added in. I received a note one time to take out 90% of my piece and “take another stab at it.”
When I thought that was being worked out, I received notice that my pieces were being discontinued, but I could still write gossip pieces. I wrote to the CEO and received a confirmation from him that this was a new direction for the site and told I could move on if I didn’t like it. So, I did. It wasn’t worth that stress.
As a writer, I feel as you do. I want my articles to have my voice, not someone else’s.
I understand what you mean. I don’t ind the actual editing, my work can always use improving. It’s the little changes that don’t seem to have any rhyme or reason that irritate me. I just grit my teeth and say, “well, at least I’m being paid.” If it’s too annoying, I will ask after a while if there is a particular reason why the changes are made.
Having worked as an editor, I can understand how easy it could be to just change something because of personal taste – luckily I can resist the urge.
Marijke
The wisest advice I ever got on the subject of editing was from a professor who said, “Bad editors don’t change anything. Inexperienced editors change too much.” A good editor always remembers that s/he has an obligation to preserve the author’s voice and meaning, even if s/he doesn’t agree with it. We’re supposed to make communication clearer, not make it our own.
In your position, I’d certainly say something to the editor. I’d probably couch it in terms of a specific change that did violence to your meaning and ask her to query you before she makes such changes in the future.
Under normal circumstances, I agree with all of the above posts. The editor has to do her job and sometimes it might hurt a little but I suck it up. I have been in the situation with a seven-year contract freelance job where a new editor changed the factual text enough that it was no longer true. When I let her know that her changes were inaccurate, she persisted on keeping it in the article. After much thought, I asked her to please take my name off the piece as I was not comfortable with the edits. She did and luckily I was paid for piece regardless. Although I was hurt that she couldn’t work with me to create a worthwhile piece, I was relieved that the inaccurate changes didn’t reflect on me any longer.
Boy, I am there right now. I am a very experienced, thorough writer whose work is practically never called into question. My new editor is overwhelmingly critical in minute detail on every piece I turn in. I didn’t expect this when I quoted them the price I did and it simply isn’t worth it. I intend to drop this gig – don’t need the stress.
I’m a writer but also do most of the editing to my work myself.
I think that may be your editor thinks she needs to make big changes, except it sounds like it is changing your ‘voice.’
Perhaps the editor sees it in her job description to make the changes, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that big changes always need to be made.
Some editors do need to make changes for style or size reasons, though it’s more likely to happen for print or online pubs than blogs.
Other editors, though they say they want other writing styles or personalities, are control freaks (that’s not always a bad thing). The only problem I have is not so much with changes but if they question everything I do or, and this has happened, make changes in an article where I know the subject matter better than they do and the changes they make in turn make the article wrong.
Back to work.
It sounds like this is a case of “house style.” Different publications have different “voices.” An article for Glamour sounds very different than one for The New York Times, even on an identical subject. Instead of confronting the editor about changing your voice, you might want to ask if she thinks you’ve failed to get the publication’s voice.
I’m also surprised that so many writers are surprised by edits. I’ve worked on several national publications, and the only writers who weren’t edited were the big-ego Pulitzer Prize and National Book Award winners.
I have dealt with some nutty editors, and I once dated a man whose editor would change his work into his own (the editor’s) voice, even though my boyfriend’s name was on the column.
One time the editor rewrote something, adding inaccurate data to what my boyfriend wrote, which had been accurate until his editor got his mitts on it! It went to print inaccurate, with my boyfriend’s name on it. My boyfriend is a well-known historian. A retraction was printed a month later, but the damage was already done.
What is even worse is that his editor wrote his own articles for the magazine as well as edited those of others. His own writing wasn’t even near the quality of my boyfriend’s writing (I say that objectively).
I do not believe it is the job of an editor to rewrite pieces, add in their own writing, or change the voice of the piece, unless it is supposed to be ghostwritten to a certain tone.
Otherwise, why was the writer hired to begin with? If they need that much editing, why do they have the job? Who is dropping the ball in hiring someone who cannot write a good piece? See my point?
I think edit-happy editors are inexperienced and perhaps egotistical. . .and any organization which has one perhaps should consider monitoring them more closely until they are more experienced, or hiring one who knows how to edit.
Edit-happy editors lose their publications quality writers who won’t put up with the stress and can find good work elsewhere.
No. It’s not a ghostwriting job. It’s for one of my corporate clients. I think she feels she’s working for a Conde Nast publication, and not a blog, to be honest. But that’s neither here nor there. I think blogs and magazines are to be edited differently, but perhaps I’m wrong. We do have a lot of stylistic issues.
I have no issues with being edited. When I submit work for publication I do so with the assumption there may be corrections or minor changes. I worked in publishing for over 12 years, as an Editorial Assistant. I worked alongside the Editor in Chief, so I think I know a little about what is to be expected.
But I also believe I’ve been spoiled. I blog for several networks and in each case no one comes along and edits my posts. Frankly, I don’t even know if my editors read them.
I do think there are reasonable edits and unreasonable edits. To correct grammar or spelling, or to make stylistic changes are one thing, to change the whole voice of a blog to include something the editor would like to see or make mention of a past article, is a whole other issue.
Interesting question! I had a similar situation and I rationalized it in a way that worked for me…
Currently, I have 2 gigs at 2 different companies.
One is as an editor. That pays $39/hour.
The other is as a writer. That pays $55/hour.
When the stuff that I write gets edited, in a way that I’m not thrilled about, I just say to myself, “Heck, I’m being paid $55/hour for this! Do what you want to it!”
I know, I know. Money isn’t everything. But I’ve been doing this gig for a few years now, and biting my tongue and swallowing my pride have been working fine so far!
This discussion has made me think about the evolution of blogs. I’m not a blogger, but I do read many different types of blogs. It seems like most companies maintain blogs in an effort to keep up with the ever-changing world of online communication. This situation between Deb and her editor is a specific one, but I wonder if it points out that editors (and their companies) are likely to take a more active interest in what is blogged about on their sites. Blogs started out as very social, personal journals, but now there are blogs maintained by companies like NBC, ESPN, TV Guide, and on and on. People read blogs not only to exchange ideas but also to gain information about the important news of the day.
I’m not saying that Deb is wrong to feel how she feels. I’m not saying that the editor is correct either. Deb knows the particulars of the situation better than I do, and this editor might have shortcomings that may need to be addressed. However, I don’t know if it’s realistic to assume that the “freedom” of a blog won’t ever change in some way. What was once a new fad on the block has now entered into the mainstream. Bloggers are fast becoming a “regular” part of daily life in the 21st century, and I think it’s very likely that editors will be taking more and more steps to be aware of what is blogged about in the name of their companies. I’m not saying that a writer should be expected to lose his/her writing voice, but I do think that the absolute “freedom” of a blog will be become less and less if the blog in question isn’t just for personal enjoyment.
Deb, I don’t mean any offense. I just think that there’s a good chance that blogs may not always be what they once were when they first came on the writing scene.
Being an editor for an international media syndicate as well as a writer (although I’m envious of Melissa; I get $14/hour for everything), I’m going to give you the editorial end of things as I would handle it.
A good editor will not change things for the sake of change. She should be able to tell you the reason for each change – and I’m talking about dangling participles, contractions, every little thing. But there are probably a few things she has experienced in the past that could affect how she edits:
1) she dealt with an incredibly egotistical writer who raked her over the coals for even basic grammatical changes
2) she has worked on articles, which, I agree, are totally different in style, content and tone
3) she is underpaid for her work or wants to be a writer but is passed over for someone she thinks is underqualified
Now for what a good editor should do:
1) realize all writers are different and some are better than others; do not project and do not take questions to your editing personally
2) pretend you never edited an article in your life and start blog editing with a clean grammatical slate; there will be dropped “g”s and slang; blogging is not certified AP style
3) do NOT ever think “Well, I would’ve written it this way”; you’re not writing it – get over that fact; if a writer is subpar, you can’t do a darn thing about it unless you own the company
What the writer should do:
1) since she is changing your tone, you have every right to bring it up with her; if she gives you a hard time, go to her boss; chances are, she’ll either learn to suck it up, or a different editor will be assigned to you
2) trust your editor (provided you and she come to some agreement); a good ed. will not change for change’s sake; there are rules that we are taught as editors, and that takes a while to get out of our heads; we love the English language, we read Shakespeare for fun, we edit books and magazines as we read them – it’s hard to let go of that.
When the company hired her, they had requirements. Probably “English/Journalism major with strong grammatical skills, 3-5 years editing experience, knowledge of AP style and/or Chicago Manual.” Not: “Someone who loves writing, can spell well, and has a good sense of humor.” We were trained a certain way and hired for certain abilities. I’m sure no one has told her yet to throw her knowledge and training out the nearest window. She’s probably doing what she thought she was hired to do.
But this doesn’t excuse complete rewrites or lack of compromising with the writer. So do not suffer in silence.
Good luck.
this is an interesting post, and I agree with Andrea that it is a clear indication of the change in how the mainstream media sees blogging. It doesn’t mean it is an accurate understanding though.
Bloggers should have a clear and distinct voice. The purpose of a blog versus an online article is to engage the reader in conversation. Therefore, your voice should be clearly heard.
Otherwise, the company you are working for should pay you for web articles. VERY different.
It sounds like your editor doesn’t truly understand the purpose of a blog-conversation.
I hope they are paying you well. Otherwise, I’d say drop the gig if you don’t like what is being done to your voice.
I’ve thankfully never had such a nitpicky situation as you’ve mentioned. The times I have had something edited, I pay attention to what was changed. If I can’t figure out a reasonable reason why, I ask. If I notice there’s been a bit of a style and/or tone change, I either make those changes myself in the next item and watch for the edits, or I ask the editor if she wants those changes made.
Something you might want to ask the editor is what she thinks the purpose of the blog is, if you haven’t heard her directly state it. You could also ask for her definition of blogs’ purpose in general. That alone could possibly cause issues, if you’re coming from different definitions.
I admit I’ve done it to others to some degree. But that was a few years ago when I was doing free grammar tutorials for some fanfic writers. (Hey, I was a minor, and it was some excellent learning experience.) I learned pretty quickly to recognize stylistic issues.
Of course, as you’ve probably noticed, I’m probably one of the youngest to comment, so you can take or leave my suggestion at your more experienced discretion.
-Misti
I am wondering whether it is done to make the blog look and sound more business oriented (corporate style).
I think if an editor wants a blog or article rewritten they should let the writer know so that at least he/she can cater to a particular format or style. It would save a lot of work in the long run. Ideally, this should be done before the blog or article is written, style wise.
Editing shouldn’t mean rewriting, it’s more polishing up work and correcting possible errors.
Hey Deb,
I run numerous blogs and work for a few networks so in some places I deal with editors and in other spots I am free to edit things on my own. I am going through a similar situation myself. I recently got a job blogging on a topic I love and the exposure is excellent. However, the main editor (also the owner of the site) goes into each article and makes changes that just grate on my nerves. If I were ghost writing I wouldn’t care at all. However, in this particular case I am not. The blog I am handling is one where it’s important for me to appear an expert and the changes being made, while silly, make me look silly, too. Meanwhile, the editor is constantly telling me how great my work is, which is leaving me kind of confused, considering.
Currently I am weighing the options as to what to do. I keep telling myself it’s not as big of a deal as I am making it, but it sure feels like it is.
Ashtyn,
I’m wondering if the site’s own/editor does it purely to optimize their business. If the blog is related to a product or service they sell, well I guess they are trying to maximize sales and are probably fussing around until they feel it ’sells’ their business. May be they are more interested in sales rather than the written material itself?
I’m a little late to the party here, but it’s possible that blog editors could be changing things for SEO reasons – adding keywords to optimize the blog for search engines and such, which is a writing issue unique to the web. It doesn’t really seem like this is the case for Deborah though, but something for writers and bloggers to keep in mind as blogging becomes more mainstream.