Last Updated: December 29, 2000
Printer-friendly version
Good writing
Reporters might edit their own work best
Editors who shift their efforts to helping writers
shape stories early in the process are rewarded with hours of saved time
and reporters who understand how to edit
By Don Fry
How would you like to save 15 minutes per day per story?
Easy, let your reporters edit themselves.
Coaching editors shift their effort to guiding writers rather than waiting
for and then editing copy. They brainstorm story assignments or ideas with
staffers, help them adjust the story during reporting, debrief them to
help organize the story, and stay handy to help if the typing breaks down.
The best editors then react to the story rather than editing it, and
return it to the writer to finish.
Self-editing has many advantages, both for the reporter and the editor,
and for the entire newsroom:
-
Reporters learn to edit, so they know how if they become editors.
-
Reporters who edit have a heightened awareness of story needs during their
reporting.
-
The person with the best information, the reporter, remains in control
of that information and keeps it accurate.
-
Reporters who edit themselves turn their stories in earlier.
-
Reporters regard the story as theirs right to the end, and take more care
with it.
-
The editor does not spend time editing copy and introducing errors into
it.
The first look
Editors react to copy by serving as the first, test reader. They look
for holes, spelling and grammar errors, Stylebook lapses, connections with
other stories, graphic and photographic potential, difficult patches, and
structure that does not serve the reader.
They read “innocently,” as a general reader rather than someone who
reads the whole paper every day, i.e., not as a news junkie.
They ask questions like, “If I didn’t read the paper yesterday, what
background would I need up high to understand today’s story?”
They worry about their readers’ familiarity with names in the news,
and especially about geographical references. Most newsrooms have a large
map of their town in sight, but most readers do not.
Their reactions may take one or all of several forms. Some editors print
the copy and mark it up with questions. Others add electronic notes with
queries and send the file back. Some send a list of questions to the reporter
without the text.
One very effective editor marks what she wants to talk about, and then
sits at the reporter’s desk and discusses the marked passages.
Some editors read the piece aloud and ask reporters what they think
needs changing. And some editors use all these techniques because different
methods work better with different writers.
Underwhelming quickly
One technique does not work here: overwhelming the reporters with so
many questions and comments that their hearts sink. The author may decide
the piece is simply hopeless, and by extension, so is the writer.
In general, if you identify the big problems, the smaller ones take
care of themselves. This system also depends on timely return of the piece
to the reporter’s control for action. You can’t let it sit for a few hours
while you go to meetings. If you can’t get right to it, ask someone else,
even another reporter, to react to it.
So you save all this time, what would you do with it? Go to more meetings?
No. Invest your extra time in researching story ideas, training the newer
staffers, giving feedback to all your reporters and simply taking a little
time to think.
Fry, an affiliate of the Poynter Institute, works as an independent
writing coach out of Charlottesville, Va. Call him at 804/296-6830, or
use e-mail: donaldfry@cs.com.
