5 Things You Must Not Do As An Editor

When it comes to editing, what not to do is no less important than what you do. It is a little more important, perhaps. An editor, by dint of the nature of his work, is at an authority. And, it is quite obvious that any person with a certain extent of authority must have a clear do’s-and-don’ts sense. So, let’s take a look at 5 tendencies an editor must avoid.

5. Do not go by numbers

Professional editors have a target to meet. They have a deadline. And when you work under deadline, time calculation is a very important factor. How much work do you have to do? When an editor estimates the volume of his work he usually goes by number of pages or words. Though this is a very common and wide-spread tendency, it can mislead you on many occasions.

As an editor you have to ensure a respectable quality of the write-up you approve. To do that you need to go through the piece and make changes where necessary. You are lucky if the writer has done a great job. You may finish editing an article in a cup-of-coffee time. What if the opposite happens! And it does! In that case you have to make so many changes that you may feel like writing it all over again.

If you have been into editing for some time now, you can relate to these issues very well. But, have you figured out what lesson to learn out of it? Do not go by numbers. You are an editor. You have to work on thoughts and expressions that are not bound by numbers and figures. Remember, you are the first person after the writer to read the article. And, it comes with an attachment of lots of responsibilities.

The safest option in this case is to estimate the maximum time it may take. If you wonder what that maximum limit is, you can consider the time you would have taken to write it by yourself. Well, it sometimes editing a piece takes longer than the time the writer took to deliver it. When such instances happen to you, it’s sheer misfortune. You can reject the write-up if you have the choice.

4. Do not procrastinate

Like writers, editors too suffer from this tendency. It may not be the case with all editors. The seasoned ones may have been able to get rid of it. Most editors, however, have felt a great deal of difficulty before the first touch of editing, or may be before opening the file. There is a simple solution to this. And, it’s all in the mind.

Let’s get to the root. Most editors in the industry have been a writer first. And as it is a very obvious fact, procrastination is one of the major characteristic features of writers. They may justify the delay with the arguments that they are taking time to think how to start, what aspects to include, to what extent to explore, what tone to speak, how frank or how objective to be, and list goes on.

When they become editors, they forget to (or, sometimes, are unable to) be free from this problem. Writers have reasons to show. It has already been unanimously accepted that writers will procrastinate, no matter if it is justified or not. How will you justify your delay? You have to work on a given text on a given idea.

For a writer, the work starts even before he starts writing; for an editor, the work starts only when he really starts it. So, you cannot procrastinate, that’s not really an option for an editor. And, if you are a news editor! Well, in that case you know how important it is to get over with the edit ‘ASAP’. You get the copy, you start editing it. There’s no gap in between.

3. Do not read the copy too many times

A nicely written copy will not require a second read. You can edit it at the first reading. Sometimes you may be lucky enough to work on copies that need just no editing at all. But, if you find a not so perfect write-up that needs your editing touches badly, you have to identify the swampy and the draggy areas. On your second read those areas will seem less swampy and draggy to you. On the third read you will find it fine.

So, when you actually are all set to edit it, you may find it completely acceptable. That naturally reduces the amount of editing on your part. You have to understand that in the process you are getting attuned to the writer, and at the same time, you are ignoring the readers’ point of view. They will find those areas swampy and draggy, exactly in the same way as you did at the first place. So, edit while you read.

2. Do not get in the shoes of the writer

Writers are often tempted to present unique thoughts in a unique way. They are even more fascinated by the way some intellectual or like-minded people would appreciate it. They completely ignore how it may fail to impress the larger part of the readers. Your job as an editor is not only to ensure that the copy is an interesting read, but also to check how the majority of the readers will relate to it.

1. Do not remove the writer

To what extent will you edit? As an editor you have the authority to make changes. But, that does not mean that changes made by you remove the writer’s work completely. Remember, you are editing the copy, you are not writing it. Though you have the right to judge if the way the writer has written is acceptable or not, you too have to be careful that you are not imposing your idiosyncratic views.

If it is not written too poorly, you must not have a problem in understanding what the writer is trying to convey and how. Now, when you judge if it is acceptable to the target readers, you have to be careful. Earlier, I have suggested not getting in the shoes of the writer. And now, I suggest you to understand what and how the writer wants to present. There is a subtle but pretty obvious distinction between the two. You as an editor and a veteran literary professional have to understand this.

As an editor is supposed to do, you should work on the piece produced by the writer. Do not exercise your writer self. You can check the grammar errors, sentence construction issues, and other silly errors, if any. You can also make changes to certain extent to improve readability, if it is so required. But, you should not make changes in a way that the original copy does not exist at all. Remember, the writer writes; that’s why you are the editor.