July 23, 2003
No Editors
Jeff Jarvis gets evsicerated by an editor at the Neiman Reports on a piece about blogging and lays out the all the fetid, bleeding guts of the edit. It's not a pretty site, but it's a great read about the editing process (or nightmare).
His take: "The edit I got back was a ham-handed butchery that also betrays plenty of print prejudices about this, our new medium."
My take: Bad editors abound on both sides of the digital divide. Jeff ran into one.
Posted by Tim Porter at July 23, 2003 03:25 PMInterestingly, my 'editors' (and I think 'tis true of a lot of other 1-person efforts) are my readers: when I screw up or cross the line in one way or another, I often here about it at length and from people with the chops to know of what they write...
When I get it right, there's not an option for an editor to screw it up. What I worry about is stuff I write that gets no response: it may be right, it may be wrong but no one's cared to look, or, at least, to respond.
Still great value in a good editor, that rare soul who helps you be a better writer, imho...
Posted by: Chris Gulker on August 3, 2003 03:11 PM