FUCK EDITORS

Trife I think I still owe you a CD or two!

Unbelievable.

I am currently (also constantly) at war with my, uh, superior here. He's not my editor, but sort of thinks he is, as he is the chief music writer or whatever. But he doesn't do any editing, and he never sees my copy until he reads it in print (the actual editor, I like, he's a nice guy).
But my, uh, supervisor just asked me when the hell am I going to write reviews again, since I've done only two or three since May. I said that I don't get anything to review. Because all the promos get sent to him and all he passes on to me are Klezmer reissues and sub-indie folk releases. And I've reviewed those, and whatever other releases he deems "NEED" to be reviewed the same week that he's reviewing something else that "NEEDS" to be reviewed. I've essentially been his bitch for two years now, and fuckit. I'm three times the writer he'll ever be (and that's not saying much, but, y'know, I AM competent, I've been doing this for 6 years) and I deserve at least the pretense of respect.

Howev, he is in tight with The Brass 'round here, so there isn't even anyone I could talk to about this and sort of say "hey, this guy is being a fuckwad. I still want to write for your paper [=I like the way your cheques clear], but this guy is making it impossible."

Tasini v. New York Times.

Editors that I haven't worked with enough, but who have treated me very well: Matos, Chuck Eddy

I'd also like to throw a "Yay" at Keith Harris. That is all.

The only trouble I had was realizing I actually had a specific assignment :(

trife I really hope "rat-faced leprechaun" was referring to Jermaine Dupri.

Whoa. Was it a negative review?

The guy was a really poor editor.

I mean, it would be one thing if the edits weren't introducing errors into the text, you know?

Totally. I hear what you're saying and am on your side.

To be clear, I do write and ask for typos and other errors to be corrected. And by errors, I don't so much mean factual stuff, but more like "this alteration of my word choice changed the meaning of this sentence slightly enough to where it's not quite right now" or "this edit messed up the subject/verb agreement" ... but still, it's mostly typos added by someone who ... uh ... maybe lacks attention to detail? Or is in too much of a hurry. Or both.

And I pick my battles on some of the more phrasing/readability kinds of things. Partly because I know that's subjective, but moreso because if I write asking for 2 or 3 typos to be fixed, I don't want to feel like I'm high-maintenance by also asking for "bigger" stuff, for lack of a better word.

I really see both sides ... dealwithit.gif and "no, you should deal with it" ... again, appreciate the chance to vent and the feedback. Truly.

better to work with an editor you trust at a place with less name recognition than a place that turns your writing into pulp

imo

whiney's advice was better in an era where a strong editorial hand was common & publications had stronger voices but now there's a chance you're being edited by a 22 year old

when i wrote about music - i remember this one editor changed "that's a bold claim" to "them's fightin' words"

annoys me thinking about it and it was about 12 years ago

lol

keepin' that ol' meme alivey

Haha the writing equivalent of wearing suspenders or a handlebar mustache

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4S2LvMKMrA

http://www.clickhole.com/article/man-mission-man-adding-and-thems-facts-end-every-w-2182

Thought this thread was about the band

the worst kind of editor is one who swaps your phrase in clear English for a cliché.

otm.

send the freelance pitch at 5:15 pm Wednesday on the East Coast or wait till Thursday morning?

Thursday morning is my instinct

mine too. the pitch is probably too long and has taken too much time, which has landed me here!

a good pitch is sent at 2am and explains why it was sent at 2am

i thought this thread was about the band editors

probably should've revived a different, less aggressively titled thread