This Is What Editors Loathe and Like in Writers
How to get on their hit list, not their sh$t list.
In my staggeringly illustrious career, I've had the fortune to be an editor and a writer, giving me a perspective from both sides of the copy.
Here’s what I’ve noticed. Most people in the industry are talented and professional. There is a reason they make a living in the storytelling business. But sometimes, I cross paths with someone the author Julia Cameron dubs a "crazymaker." Frustratingly annoying people who make your life hell.
Sometimes it's personal, but mostly it's just their personality.
Some examples: I once had an editor who would scribble "Lame!" in the margins next to sentences he didn't like. Then, there was the writer who called me in my car while I was picking up my daughter from school, falsely accusing my company of plagiarizing a story she'd written for someone else. She followed this up with an email to my boss from a fictional lawyer threatening to sue.
People are entitled to their opinions. They are entitled to push back when they don't feel like they're being treated fairly. But there is a proper and respectful way to behave.
It's hard enough to stay afloat in the publishing business. Do you want to be the person who brings everyone down?
I always tell aspiring writers don't burn bridges, or you may be left stranded. That advice has served me well. I was hired at Entrepreneur by an editor I hired 15 years earlier. If I had threatened to sue him, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have gotten that call.
On this week’s episode of the Write About Not Podcast, I talked to Slate Senior Editor Shannon Palus. She assigns many stories and works with some of the top writers in the science and health space.
I asked her about the traits of the writers she enjoys working with. Here's what she said:
Their stories are well-researched and fact-checked. “I’m not asking what the source is for this every other paragraph,” Shannon says.
They have a chatty, conversational style. This, of course, depends on the publication, but nine out of 10 times, editors at consumer-facing magazines prefer you have a conversation with the reader rather than talk at them. When a writer struggles with an element of a story, I will often advise them to step back and write as if they’re explaining it to a friend.
They follow advice. Editors are under tight deadlines. They don't have time to debate every change. The writers editors like to work with can take criticism and suggestions. They're not precious about their work and don't push back on the edits unless they feel strongly about it.
“I think taking notes well is one of the most important parts about being a writer or just being a functioning member of a creative organization," Shannon says. “They don't get bent out of shape, and they don't take it personally.”
They’re respectful. Even when good writers disagree with an edit, they do it thoughtfully and respectfully. “They try to see where you're coming from and maybe suggest something else that would work better,” she says.
A few positive practices I would add:
They file their stories on time. I am still surprised with how many stories come in late with every excuse in the book.
Their stories are close to the original word count assigned. Don't depend on the editor to cut a piece in half because you couldn't figure out what had to stay and what had to go.
They underpromise and overdeliver. I love to be pleasantly surprised by a story. Maybe something gets in there that we didn’t talk about originally that makes it so much better.
Ok, now that we know some actions editors like in their writers, what about the things they do that make them one-story stands? I asked Shannon to come clean about the writers she will never work with again.
They don't follow directions and ignore your notes. Shannon recalls working with a writer who kept putting back in sentences or paragraphs that she deleted in her edit. “That’s a writer I can't work with again because I feel like that's the opposite of communicative.”
They don't use track changes. This is also a pet peeve of mine. Tracking changes in Word or google docs saves an editor a ton of time and confusion about your revisions. Explains Shannon,
“If you send copy back, and you have not tracked changes, I have to go through (the story) and reorient myself all over." For the record, both Shannon and I prefer receiving copy in Word than google but Gen Z seems to love them some google.”
A few more annoyances I would add:
They address your comments with more comments. For example, I will ask a writer, “Does such and such person still work at the company?” And they will respond in the comments, “Yes.” I wasn’t taking a survey. I was asking so that you could work the answer into the copy.
They’re weird about money. Nobody likes to quarrel about money. I certainly don't. That’s why we have written agreements. Most publishing companies have set freelance rates (and the rate per word is much lower than it was in the 90s and early 2000s). Unless you have a really, really good reason, don’t try to bargain for a few extra dollars. It comes across as desperate and mercenary and makes me not want to work with you again.
To hear my entire interview with Shannon Palus, listen here.
If you liked this story, please help me get the word out by sharing it and clicking on that little heart icon.