New Year, Old Mistakes – Part II

A few days after posting Part I of my editing tips, I heard from a writer whom I used to work with. He thanked me for my helpful advice, but wanted to know if I could go a little deeper. Like so many professional journalists these days, time (or lack of it) is one of his biggest enemies when it comes to accuracy, and he asked if I could offer him suggestions on how to prevent skipped words, extra words and other errors.

So, I’m going to repeat a little bit of the advice that I gave him, in hopes that it can help more of the writers who are increasingly having to do the work of two people, if not more.

I want to reiterate that I think one of the best approaches to preventing mistakes is to read  what you’ve written (or even whisper) out loud — which is especially good for finding missing words and repetition. It can also help with misplaced modifiers, another popular mistake. (Particularly common in classifieds. For sale: Beautiful writing desk for ladies with finely carved legs and large drawers.)

I know this next one is difficult to do for a writer, but at some point when you’ve more or less finished your article or Web site or whatever, you’ve got to read through it as if you aren’t the writer, as if you don’t know everything about the story/person/event/topic. Obviously, as the writer, you’ve got SO MANY details running through your head when you’re reading your own work, but if you want to do a good self-edit, you need to just focus on the words — not all the work/research/reporting that are behind the words.

After all, the reader is only going to see the words on the page, or the Web site (she’s not going to know the “back story” — and she’s not going to care).

I’ve been working with this man who hired me to help him improve his writing skills to advance his career. He’s actually quite good already. Whenever I have him write passages, or edit long passages, if I notice several mistakes, I ask him to read out loud. And it’s amazing how I can literally see the lightbulb come on when he vocalizes any writing mistakes he made.

Reading your writing aloud is nothing new — some of the best writers and reporters I know do it religiously. And as hard-pressed  as you often are for time, it’s something you have to make time for — especially if your writing has a lot of errors in it.

Post under fire for rise in errors

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/15/AR2010011502419.html

In the above article, The Washington Post’s ombudsman, Andrew Alexander, attempts to defend/explain why there has been a recent uptick in errors in the newspaper. In the latter part of 2009, Alexander writes, an increasing number of readers wrote in to complain about the sloppy mistakes.

There are some comments I agree with in Alexander’s article, but perhaps more that have me a bit riled – starting with the headline (and I would lay odds that a copy editor didn’t write it!): “Why you’re seeing more copy-editing errors in The Post.”

The implication in that headline (and the meaning that most readers will likely take from reading it) is that the copy editors are MAKING the errors. OK, OK, I know some of you will insist that errors of omission are just as serious as errors of commission. And while, for the most part, I would agree with you, for purposes of responding to Alexander’s article, I’m going to play devil’s advocate. But first, I do have to say that, absolutely, whether I’m copy editing for a newspaper, magazine, book publisher, a business, or an individual, if a mistake, any mistake, gets into print, I accept responsibility for it. It doesn’t matter whether I caught 999 errors and poorly worded phrases, if I let even one get past me, it bothers me — a lot.

But Alexander’s article attempts to explain to readers why they’re seeing increasingly shoddy writing. And to imply, in the headline, that it is due to copy editors MAKING the errors (as opposed to reporters, which is actually the case), it chaps my you-know-what just a wee bit. Alexander explains that “reduced staffing” has played “some role” in the spike in errors. Then he goes on to detail how, newsroomwide, in the past decade, staffing has dropped 28 percent as of today.  But then he cites a drop in copy editor staffing (and only through mid-2008) of 43 percent!! And with more copy editors departing in 2009, that 43 percent figure is actually higher as of today. Alexander goes on to describe how, in addition to losing about half of their team, copy editors at The Post are now responsible for many additional tasks, stemming from work on the Web site.

So, no, Mr. Alexander, the increase in published mistakes, and  the rise in complaints by testy readers, should not be attributed to “more copy-editing errors.” Instead, the accurate explanation is either MORE errors by the reporters (who, I’ll wager, are also having to do more work) or the same volume of errors they’ve always made … but instead of The Post now fielding a full team of copy editors to prevent those mistakes from getting through, it’s sending out a team minus a shortstop, center fielder, first baseman and catcher. What kind of chance does a defense like that have?

Alexander somewhat redeems himself with his final comment: “In the end, nothing can replace the experienced, fastidious copy editor. And nothing can help them more than reporters getting it right in the first place.”  It just would have made for a more accurate article if Alexander had gotten it right in the first place, instead of the article’s last line.

Which segues perfectly with a comment a friend made to me this week, in an e-mail. This friend, whose identity I will protect for her safety, is the most amazing journalist I know. She played a large role in my decision to become a journalist, and she has about 25 years in the biz. She’s extremely well-respected in the industry and has held a lot of positions for major news organizations. So, to her comment:

“Newspapers that do that (get rid of most of their copy editors) are going to regret it so soon. The dirty secret of all newspapers is that reporters often can’t write to save their lives, and copy editors keep the paper from looking ridiculous and illiterate.”

I post this here not to piss off all my reporter friends — many are excellent writers as well as being amazing reporters. And, to imply that the comment applies to the majority of reporters would be unfair and, untrue. But the plain truth is, some are not good writers (and a smaller portion are quite bad). However, readers have never been aware of this because line editors and copy editors pretty everything up. But it’s reaching a point where there’s almost no one left to give the raw writing the needed makeover.

If You’re Going to Give Advice…Edit Twice

I was on Twitter the other day and saw a tweet from a fellow editor, linking to her blog. The entry was something like “10 Tools an Editor Can’t Live Without,” so I decided to check it out. I’m not going to provide the link here because I don’t want to embarrass the woman.

The blog looked great, visually. I must admit I was envious. But then I began reading. And in her very first “tool,” she advised all editors to have a copy of “Stunk and White’s.” I’m probably stating the obvious to all the other editor/writer folks who are reading this, but for the others: The book she was referring to is “The Elements of Style” by Strunk and White, one of the top reference books for editors.

I cringed but kept on reading. And as I did so I continued to cringe. Every couple of graphs or so there was a glaring error — the type that professional editors are taught to catch in their first editing, or writing/reporting, class. Incorrect possessives. Subject-verb agreement. Misspelled words.

Let’s face it. We come upon these types of mistakes and bad writing practically every time we read something online. But, shouldn’t an editor’s blog be held to a higher standard? Shouldn’t an editor hold herself to a higher standard? This particular editor was using her blog as her Web site, and was marketing her services on it, as well. But I think the thing that troubled me the most was that this particular blog entry was clearly giving advice to other editors, and yet it was littered with bad mistakes.

As an editorial consultant, one of the challenges I sometimes face is getting people to understand why it is important (monetarily and reputation-wise) for them to make a good impression with their written words. So to see another editor who doesn’t even seem to understand that is puzzling.

We all make mistakes, we all make typos. And yes, I’m not immune. (And if/when I make mistakes, I would love for any other eagle-eyed editors to point them out to me!) But there’s a clear difference between a simple typo and numerous grammatical mistakes that seem to indicate that you don’t even edit your own writing.

I’ve recently begun editing/rewriting blogs for some professionals who clearly understand how important making a good impression is. With the millions of blogs online today, why should I, or you, take advice from or hire someone who can’t put his thoughts across in a comprehensible and accurate manner?

Next time, I’ll offer some basic self-editing tips that you can incorporate in your blogs or on your Web sites.