Let's Talk About Good and Bad Editors On Medium
A few thoughts that might be helpful to both writers and editors.
Happy Friday!
True story. I once submitted a piece to a publication on Medium. The editor said some of my sentences are too short. She asked me to combine my short sentences with the sentence before or after to make them longer. Plus, she highlighted the dialogue and asked me to please use quotation marks.
It was an editor who’d never edited me before. I wrote back and said high variability in sentence length is how I write. I don’t do all long sentences. And I don’t use quotation marks. But I make sure it’s clear what’s dialogue and who’s talking. But if any dialogue is unclear, please tell me so I can fix it.
I explained that what I’m hoping for, from an editor, is to know where I fumbled the ball. If something is confusing or feels clunky, please tell me so I can fix that. But mechanics of writing? I’m really not looking for feedback on “how” I write.
She had every right to tell me to flake off. It’s her publication. She knows what she wants. But she said oh, okay. Pointed out a confusing bit. I fixed it. Done.
Also true. Once a writer submitted a piece to one of my pubs. I told her a couple of parts I felt were confusing. She yoinked the piece. Removed from the publication. Christ. That feels like crap to be on the receiving end of. I’m just trying to run a publication. Also? That’s not how grownups should communicate, yeah?
But that’s not even the worst. I had one writer submit a piece that read pretty rough. I thought it had promise. So I was trying to work with her on flow. On the third round she said this is BS, it’s taking too long, and blocked me. Just. Wow.
Editing is a fine kettle of fish. Truly.
I used to write for magazines years ago. I’d submit a piece and it would come back with edits. I’d make the edits. Send back. Get more. Rinse, repeat. At the end of the process we had a finished story and I got paid. I did not have to pay the editor.
Where else do you get a free set of eyes on your writing that you don’t have to pay for? Nowhere else I know of, really. In print and on Medium. You sure don’t get that if you publish a book on Amazon. You don’t get that on other writing sites like Vocal or Newsbreak. A second set of eyes you don’t have to pay isn’t nothing.
But at the same time? Not all editors on Medium are professionals. They are not trained in “how” to edit. They’re just people who run publications because they’re trying to create something meaningful for their readers.
But then again, most writers on Medium aren’t professionals either. Worth keeping in mind. I have some journalists that write for me. They are an absolute delight to work with. They can take constructive feedback and never stomp off in a snit.
Here’s another layer. Not all editors *will* edit submissions. Nor should they be expected to. No one is paying Medium editors for their time. Running a publication is a labor of love. A publication is just someone trying to build something.
In my publications, if I see minor edits, I’ll mention them. If I get a submission that reads like a first draft and needs a ton of work, I just don’t accept it. I’m sorry. I just don’t have time. I have a full time job. I like to have time to write, too. I expect writers to know when a piece is finished and when it’s a rough draft.
It’s on writers to learn how to write and to learn what a publication is looking for. It’s not on editors to teach that.
But some editors? Omg. There are editors who will get into Google docs and walk a writer through from that first brain dump to a finished piece. It’s nice that they have the time (or desire) to do that. We don’t all.
But also? There are editors who spend hours helping a new writer shape a piece of work and still end up with something un-boostable. Some editors have more enthusiasm than actual editing skill. Willingness and ability aren’t the same.
See what I mean by a fine kettle of fish? No two scenarios are the same.
Plus, there are different kinds of editing
In the publishing world there are different types of editors. The developmental or substantive editor looks at overall story. The line or content editor looks at the flow of the writing. Proofreaders look for typos. That’s just a few. Point being, not all editors do the same job or look for the same thing. Same applies when editing essays. There are different kind of editing. Not everyone knows or thinks about that.
Some editors just look for typos. Others look for clunky bits. Others look for overall flow. Once they find issues, how they handle them is yet another story.
Neil Gaiman says a good editor can tell you what’s wrong, but they can’t tell you how to fix it. Because then it’s “their” voice, not yours. I agree. Not all editors do. There are editors who will try tell you how to fix your writing. That doesn’t make them wrong. It just means their opinion is not the same as mine. That’s worth knowing.
There’s a type of editing I love to do, but don’t get to do very often. I love when I see a writer’s weak point. A chain is only as strong as the weakest link and that includes a chain of words. I love to be able to say look, you lean into hyperbole too much and it costs you credibility. Cut the hyperbole. Tell what you see. It will be more powerful.
Or maybe this. You start too weak. And that’s okay. It’s how you wind into the writing. Part of your process. But you can almost always cut your first paragraph. I have struggled with that one myself.
Writers always have weak point. Maybe it’s flowery descriptions. Maybe it’s getting off track. Maybe it’s softening parts that shouldn’t be softened. Maybe it’s passive instead of active voice, or switching tenses. There’s no writer who doesn’t have weak points. It’s why we hear all that stuff about killing your darlings. That’s what it means. Being attached to stuff that doesn’t serve the reader or the story.
But not everyone wants to hear their weak points. Writers have soft underbellies. But when they do want to hear that? It almost always makes them a stronger writer. From me, that kind of feedback is earned. I need to know you aren’t going to yoink a story, or have a meltdown. Because life is too short for that kind of aggravation when I’m not getting paid. Hell, life is too short for aggravation even if I am getting paid.
Now let’s talk about Medium’s Boost editors…
Medium’s Boost program added a whole new level that I don’t hear anyone talking about. Less than 3% of the stories that go up on Medium every day get boosted.
If you get boosted regularly, that says something about the quality of your writing. If you don’t, that doesn’t necessarily mean you’re a lousy writer. Might just mean you’re not writing cover level stories. It’s like a magazine. Lots in the table of contents, but not every story in the contents will make it to the cover.
Another level to that, too. It’s the ability of any given curator to know what *is* a cover level story. Every single day, they decline stories that go on to get thousands of views without being boosted. No one hits it out of the park every time. Not writers, not editors and not curators either. You know?
Here’s a big scary idea.
I wonder what would happen if writers sent drafts to editors in the boost program and asked — is this boost quality? Would you nominate this? And if not, why not?
And if they had the bravery to ask, I wonder if editors would be brave enough to reply. And if they did, I wonder if writers would be able to hear and learn from the reply. Honest communication is really hard. It means you can’t take it personal.
I don’t tell writers whether I’m going to nominate their stories. Every time I do not nominate a story, I can tell you why. But will I? Very rarely. Too many writers get hurt or angry or defensive. I’m not here to stomp on feelings. So I quietly choose what to nominate and don’t tell the writer until they get the yay, you’re boosted email.
I signed my nominator contract last March. Almost a year. You get a feel for what will get approved after a while. But what a boost nominator sees and what a writer wants to hear aren’t always the same. In some ways, that’s a real shame.
The issue always comes down to the ability to have honest communication. The ability to have honest communication is the soil in which everything grows. But both parties need to be able to do that. Not just the writer, not just the editor. Both.
It requires a compatibility that’s hard to find, but absolute gold if you find it. I think that’s worth thinking about. Maybe even talking about.
Looking forward to your thoughts!
When a writer yanks a submission I sometimes feel like it's a relief. One less thing for me to worry about.
I'm happy to tell writers my thoughts on whether something is "Boost worthy" but I always preface it by saying that, ultimately, I don't make the decision on what is selected. The curators surprise me quite often. We're all learning. Great post!
I worked in newsrooms for 30 years, so I have edited thousands of pieces by good and poor writers. I have also had thousands of my pieces edited by others, some better than others. I know how to edit, and I appreciate it when a good editor improves my copy -- whether it's fixing a typo or pointing out something that doesn't quite work. I especially appreciate it if a good editor on Medium tells me my piece would be more Boostable if I did A or B. That's gold!
If you're not in the Boost program, it's difficult to get a sense of this. Every nommer I've read says something about how they've learned over time to get a sense of what Medium is looking for. It's something that will take a while for a writer to learn, because we don't have the information a nommer has by working within the program.
The only thing I object to is the nommer trying to get me to pay them to tell me what might make me more Boostable.