I read a nice piece just now by Dave Kindred on sportsjournalism.org on sports columnists’ appreciation and frustration with copy editors.
The story stemmed from the infamous Mark Whicker sports column on Jaycee Lee Dugard and what she missed in the world of sports while she was held captive in her kidnapper’s back yard for 18 years.
As tasteless, tacky and regrettable as Whicker’s column was, it’s also pretty bad that the Orange County Register’s editors working on it didn’t speak up when their internal alarms apparently went off.
I hope if I were ever in a situation like that, I’d have the courage say something. Of course, I’ve never come close to reading anything that despicable, but there have been bits here and there that troubled me enough to ask a co-worker or two, “Hey, does this read weird to you?” or “Should we take this out?”
I’ve heard of diva columnists having “no-edit clauses” (not at my job, thankfully), and I really can’t think of anything editing-wise much more appalling and arrogant. No word on whether Whicker was one of those though.
Anyway, the point of Kindred’s column was that Whicker was deprived of what every writer needs: an attentive editor. Kindred presumed that material-wise, Whicker was probably having a bad day coming up with something to write about and went in the wrong direction.
If Whicker is not a “no-edit” guy, it’s upsetting to think that a situation was in place where editors felt like they couldn’t speak up about their concerns. Kindred indicated Whicker was a well-respected veteran newsman before this debacle, not that he had a reputation for being edgy or inflammatory.
It’s too easy sometimes for an editor to think to herself, “Well, he can say what he wants. It’s not my name at the top.”
But the job is about so much more than grammar and facts - you have to have your internal sensitivity meter at level 10 at all times. That doesn’t mean you change every little thing, you just use your best judgment and seek a second or third opinion too.
There’s a fine line between changing too much and too little in copy. I have learned that the best way to let a writer have his or her “voice” is to have a reason for changing anything. If I change a single word, I want to have a defense ready if I am asked about it later. That method can be frustrating at times because it slows you down, but I have to remember that in the end, it indeed is not my name at the top.
After reading Kindred’s column, I have a new appreciation for columnist Joe Posnanski, who says in an e-mail to Kindred, “The best editors are worth ten times their weight in gold.”
They appreciate the recognition. (And that should have been “10″, Joe.)
