TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:FW: (Writing and) Editing as a career From:David Slonosky <David -dot- Slonosky -at- ITLS -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 13 Jan 1998 16:44:39 -0500
-----Original Message-----
From: David Slonosky [SMTP:David -dot- Slonosky -at- itls -dot- com]
Sent: January 13, 1998 4:44 PM
To: 'Eric J. Ray'
Subject: RE: (Writing and) Editing as a career
On January 13, 1998 3:47 PM, Eric J. Ray [SMTP:ejray -at- RAYCOMM -dot- COM] wrote:
> Hey, fellow techwhirlers,
> I could use your wisdom and feedback.
> In my experience, I've found that many tech writers are expected
> to edit their own work. Does this match your experience(s)? In my
We're lucky here because that's not the case.
> current position, I have been instructed to edit all my own work and
> submit it in a publishable state before it goes out for (subject matter
> expert) SME review. We have a final step where another writer is
> supposed to proofread the document, but this is after everything else
> has been done. I've tried to get another writer/editor in on the
> process earlier, but I've been unable to convince my department of the
> value in this. While I definitely agree that a writer should strive to
> edit their own work and submit it in a clear, presentable state,
> submitting it in a publishable state before the technical review seems
> an arduous standard to achieve, and an ill-use of time if/when the
> content changes based on that review.
Editing takes time because it does involve a different mindset (as noted
below). The editor is removed from the process of creating the full
document, so they have a perspective that allows them to catch mistakes,
style deviations, and grammatical nonsense.
It's good that at least you have another writer to proofread your
document. I know that even if I proofread my own stuff, I'll invariably
miss *something*. I'm too close to my own writing style to catch tiny
mistakes, because my brain fills in over the mistake and I don't notice
it, if that makes any sense.
But I strongly believe having an editor involved in the process is
crucial.
