Current Publishing Practices

In My Humble Opinion
1

The editor of a denominationally based Christian magazine asked one of her friends to write a book review for the magazine. The friend was aware that she would not be paid for the review. (The magazine is underfunded.)

As a personal favor, the friend, a former teacher (but not me), read a book which she would not otherwise have read. She wrote the review and submitted it to the editor. It was never published. When the friend inquired about the review, the editor said that she kept reviews in a file.

Is this standard practice now?

This same editor asked another friend (me) to write an article on someone I know who is a church leader. I began doing my homework for the piece and had literally months before the deadline.

Although the United Methodist Publishing House has bought the copyright to and published several short pieces I’ve written, that was long ago. I agreed to write the article free of charge and took delight in the opportunity to write about one of my friends.

After a month of working on it in my head and talking with mutual friends, I asked the editor how many words she wanted. She said that she had reassigned the article to someone else. No explanation was given and I was too startled to question her further.

What do you think of this practice?

Once an article is submitted, the editor is free to make any changes she wishes without consulting with the writer. I’m not talking about just grammar and spelling corrections and editing for pagination. The article then goes to publication.

I made changes as an editorial assistant, but never would I have changed the actual content.

Is this common these days?

Any input will be much appreciated although I may not be able to respond quickly.

2

My experience may be unusual - I held various flavors of assistant/associate editor positions for monthly journals (English language) in Egypt, and now am the editor of a business newsletter in Jakarta, dealing with a lot of professional freelance journalists.

From my perspective, most of what you describe sounds like nothing more than boorish behavior - no, it isn’t standard (or shouldn’t be), but it happens because people are jerks. I would liken hearing that an editor has reassigned a piece without telling you to applying for a job, having an interview, and then never hearing back from the firm. It should not happen, but it does.

On the other hand:

In my experience this happens all the time, and with good reason. Writers (and I am one, so I include myself in this category) often lavish attention on every word and cannot see “the big picture” that explains why anyone would alter their precious prose. As an editor, you have to take a different approach - does the article fit the available space? Is it redundant, either internally or perhaps with a different article in the same publication? Is it consistent with the larger theme of the publication, and/or does it say anything inconsistent with a different article? Will it appeal to the readership? Etc.

So yeah, editors change what writers write all the time, and since one editor is often dealing with 5 or 10 writers at a time, we simply don’t have the luxury of going back to the writer and saying “here, do you mind if I make this change?” Besides, what happens if the author takes it badly and says “no, you can’t change what I wrote!” The editor is still going to need to make some kind of change, as the reasons for the change, whatever they were, won’t have disappeared.

In a perfect world there would be more dialogue prior to publication (whenever it is practical, I do involve writers in the revision process - in fact I am procrastinating right now, as soon as I finish this email I will read a writer’s first draft and send her a note telling her the changes I want HER to make). But time doesn’t always permit it, and also, the bottom line is: usually, the editor is in charge of the publication and has final say (with exceptions for especially prominent or trusted authors). Authors get the glory for great articles, but editors get the crap for bad ones.

3

Definitely not standard. In the first case, when you write an article for a magazine – even if only doing it for copies – the assumption is that the article will be published. Asking to do it and then burying it (except in special cases*) is the work of a rank amateur. The same for reassigning an article without telling the author. At the very least, it’s bad manners; once you make an assignment, you stick with it. If there’s a problem, then you tell the author that you’ve found someone else.

Many writers would no longer submit to the magazine for issues like this. Your time is valuable – even if you don’t get paid for it – and it’s much better used writing for magazines where your work isn’t flushed down the toilet.

The editorial changes are more common. With deadlines, there often isn’t enough time to contact the author for a rewrite. If an ad comes in and they have to cut a paragraph to fit, they can’t wait for you to agree.

*For instance, if events overtake the article. A restaurant review of Windows on the World would be killed if it wasn’t in the pipeline prior to 9/11.

4

Having stuff in an article can, to be used as space allows, isn’t unheard of, but if that was the editor’s intention for the book review, that should have been made clear to the author.

Reassigning an article without notifying the author is unacceptable.

Rewriting or reconstructing an article can be necessary, for the reasons Carol outlines. If there’s time I’ll bounce it back to the author, but sometimes it’s easier (as well as faster) just to do it myself.

5

That’s what I thought would be appropriate unless the editor actually rewrites the author’s point-of-view and submits it.

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I’m glad to know that publishing courtesy hasn’t crumbled.

twickter, I was hoping that you would show up.

Again, my thianks!

More comments are welcome if others want to contribute.