Listening to a repeat of a story from the public radio show, "On the Media" about under-appreciated copy editors, I appreciate how lucky I was to have THREE copy editors for my book, Teacher of Our Town. One of them scrutinized the manuscript for content, organization and factual errors, making positive suggestions for improvement, and two scrutinized the manuscript primarily for spelling and grammar errors, but also for factual errors.
Every writer needs good editors. Just as every lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client, every writer who tries to be his own editor has a fool for an editor.
The sad news at newspapers, magazines and book publishers is that copy editors are a vanishing breed. This is a long-term trend, going back to the 1980s, and accelerated in this recession, even at such industry leaders as The Washington Post. Copy editors have been laid off in droves, with publishers hoping the public won't notice. But the public does notice that newspapers, magazines and books these days have MORE ERRORS.
A major drawback of blogs and the fast pace of online publishing is that no time is built in for copy editing or for rewriting. If newspapers with their daily deadlines have historically been the "first draft of history," online journalism with a deadline every minute is "the first draft of newspapers."In other words, it's often half-baked.
Newspapers' standard-setters, fact-checkers, and nitpickers who used to demand quality control are a dying breed. As a consequence, language and discourse have been impoverished. In "real-time" interactive media, writers are increasingly dependent on READERS to spot errors that can be easily corrected quickly online.
Continue reading "In Praise of A Vanishing Breed: Copy Editors" »




Recent Comments