Sub-editors: how can I avoid killing them?

Seriously, does anyone actually aspire to this position in life? Who are these people? WHY DO THEY HATE ME???

OK, rant over. Just had to get that out of my system.

x-post - Some people really do care about checking the details. You get constant work and a reasonably interesting working atmosphere - it's not such a bad life.

as a chief sub - particularly in my previous job - i have often wanted to kill other subs, and have doled out the beatz in no uncertain terms. there are many subs out there who could, given enough time, reduce a beautifully written article to a sheet of smeared toilet paper.

but what i really, really resent here is the original poster's tone; this notion that we're glorified spell-checkers who "occasionally" have to worry about style etc, and that we're basically a hindrance. if you're genuinely unhappy with the way something's been subbed, speak to the chief sub. if, on the other hand, you're just a bit pissy because some "clever" piece of sub-sixth-form scribbling has been hacked out and chucked in the bin where it belongs ... don't waste their time. unless you like bite marks in the top of your head.

Anyway, without them you'd probably end up looking stupid 95% of the time when they rescue your copy, rather than 5% of the time when they screw it up.

i'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt here. was your entire post at 4.31pm a slightly tongue-in-cheek affair, motivated entirely by a sense of perceived injustice at one piece of sloppy subbing?

x-post: the amount of sense being talked by everyone else on this thread is a thing of joy. on behalf of subs everywhere: thank you!

i would be tempted to deliberately fuck up your work after that. also if you ctually speak to subs like that, don't be surprised if your commissioning editor gets a bit cool with you - they can quite easily drop it into conversatiuon that you're a pompous, obnoxious ass. the answer to why people sub-edit is that it's a good job, regular money and isn't that hard to do if you don't have to deal with morons. 3 people on my desk are widely published and respected writers in our own rights (this is often the case on national papers). a bad sub is a bad thing, true. however, when you're working on big-ass publications like i do, bad subs don't tend to stay employed for very long, so the likelihood is that they know what they're doing. NRQ is also spot on the money re editors.

write them lots of emails with all sorts of grammar errors. AND HAHA USE TWO SPACES AFTER A FULLSTOP!

also see: Put Me In Coach, I'm Ready To Play

roffle.

ken, grr :)

"a"

WORD DOCS? what are these "word docs" of which you speak?

we use an antiquated version of QPS, which logs every revision anyone makes. then, using cutting-edge technology, it locates the one that will reveal just who fucked something up really badly and deletes it.

(btw, i'm pretty sure you don't want to work with me - sounds like you have a good job already)

stelfox, you come and work with ME :) :) :)

slightly lax capitalization?

that's an oxford zed, bitches.

So spelling things correctly on ILX would be something of busman's holiday?

ok, i see; that sounds pretty cool

but we subs are brane-ded, remember? :)

i did once save 200 revisions of a feature, in order to try to force it to delete the one on which my colleague had written the headline: "THIS IS FUCKING PISH WRITTEN BY A DICK."

Tracer, re: track changes: the NYT does this. You can track through a story and see every change, who it was made by and when. It's a good thing.

There is one star writer on the publication I sometimes sub for who is fond of these and she is unfortunately the one whose copy we are apparently not allowed to touch cause she goes mental. Making her pieces look badly subbed. It makes me a bit cross.

i did this once. she went absolutely fucking mental at me. made no difference, but DAMN i felt better about it.

I have this on my clipboard:
A sub-editor's job is to check spellings, facts and libels, and sometimes polish up house style or cut something carefully to length.
But I see Grimly's already taken you to task for exactly the same things I was going to. Apart from the fact that it's "spelling" you want.

You're wrong about the role of subs, and you're very wrong about their motivations. Harold Evans says it better than me:
" Journalists who choose editing as their craft will have less obvious excitement than the reporter: not for them the thrill of detection or the fast plane to Beirut. Their satisfaction lies in the skills of the crafty, in communicating. And there are some excitements which reporting cannot match. There are nights of big news, the late-night flash in the Gulf War crisis, when text editors feel they are standing at the very centre of events. There is nothing to touch the fascination of seeing the news develop second by second and projecting a piece of history."

They're not failed reporters either: Evans goes on to talk about a Sir William Haley, who was "painfully shy" for reporting, but after switching to subbing became editor of the Times.

Spell checkers, hmph. Why do they hate you? Because you appear to believe that they're automatons who stand between your precious words and the public, a hindrance to be worked around; if you tried working with them you'd probably find them hugely pleased about it, and far less likely to fuck with your copy without asking you. Best advice though: email Grimly, go on.

xposts: Alba, what you should do is what I did: just lop the last par off her drivel. If you tell Grimly, he goes this funny colour and does all these comedy hand gestures. Or he did that time.

There is a lot of shitty writing out there, someone has to clean it up! It can be kind of fun esp. if you appreciate clarity and precision in language. (Often I read articles & just want to ask.. what do you mean! Be clear! I don't know, maybe it was that analytic philosophy course that got to me..)

hahaha STET

that was me trying to stop myself ripping your head off.

and subby mcsub: respect ;)

x-post: gypsy mothra, even more respect. beautifully put.

anyway, i need to get on with the goddamn fucking fashion pages, or my drinking time will be severely curtailed.

Oh god, if I ever had to work with Grimly again ...

I've worked on both sides of the desk, and now that I write more than I edit I find it terrifying to send in work without a proper review process in place; it's like wirewalking without a net.

The only really annoying editor I've worked with was the one who inserted lewd jokes into the copy, ostensibly for my amusement. Even that might've been okay if they'd been funny.

Mad props for tomorrow's actually-sexy-for-once fashion spread, by the way. I told the girls it was your job to touch up the nipples in Photoshop.

Actually, that might improve the pages :)

and alba, i've never touched up a nipple in my life :p

*bangs head on brick wall for ever*

oh, and i've given up on the fashion until monday, when i can maybe - just maybe - effect some form of fucking communication between the fashion stylist and the picture editor.

the original poster was right? who would aspire to this? apart from a pedant with a god complex.

oh, hang on.

1) i hate how brits call copy editors "sub-editors." copy editors do a very different job than story editors, department editors, editors-in-chief. we're not sub-anything. we have our own job to do. (i say "we" because i've paid the bills this way for much of my adult life.)

2) everyone who said "if you don't want your piece butchered, brush up on whatever style or reference guides the publication uses, be aware of how long your piece should be and exceed that so that with the dead wood being cut out your best stuff is likelier to stay in, and no matter how much it pains you, get used to writing the kind of writing that editors like to publish, and if that bothers you go home and start a blog" OTM OTM OTM.

3) i've never butchered a strong piece. i've never had to. yes, you absolutely should take it personally. sorry.

Not sure I understand: do you mean there's some copy to sub, then there's an instruction telling you to write some copy in the style of the stuff you've been subbing?

If so, maybe stating the obvious, but don't just rewrite the stuff you're meant to be subbing. Sub test documents are often there to trip you on fact-checking, house style, consistency & the little things: double spaces, en dashes, date styles etc. It's really an attn to detail test; only rewrite where necessary, and lightly.

Other subs may disagree.

well the document is called 'subbing test' but in the instructions it says to 'write an appetising listing' for two programmes, for which there are 2 bits of blurb, one from a production office, one from a publicity office. the one from the prod office is about the right word count theyre asking me to write a listing for, so not sure whether to really write my own one, or to just try and reword the existing one slightly. if thats the case, theres not much there to change really.

maybe it is there to trip me up, not sure.

Ah, ok. So it does sound a sort of writing test. Ignoring me might be best.

who knows. thanks tho.

i mean, one listing has the title in all caps, the other is sentence case. doesnt even seem to be a house style to stick to!

Sometimes it only takes one.

Having begun working as a sub the last couple of years, I'm astonished, ASTONISHED at the state of some of the copy I have to work on. As a writer, the thought of sending in a piece of copy that hadn't been rewritten and reread enough times to be immaculate is akin to walking around with my balls hanging out of my fly. It appears a lot of writers, however, do not feel this way.

I can see why y'all start blogs. To avoid killing editors.

if any london ilxors know of any part-time sub editor jobs currently available this would be fun and useful (i'm one of the good ones that no one wants to kill) (probably)

based on what a friend told me who worked here, the spec always needs temp sub-editors, and they're informal enough that they could probably be cold-called

(disclaimer: i may be totally misinformed)

ooh that sounds interesting (lol also er challenging), thank you!

I'm not sure how to link to it, mark, but the subs_uk yahoogroup is a good source of work offers

cheers stevie, i will hunt that down on monday :)

i got my gig at heat via the group and now work there pretty much every month!

mark s, Dominic Wells - former Time Out editor - was looking for a London-based sub recently on Facebook. Caveat: I think the work would be on advertorials for The Times and Sunday Times.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pp7RDqY1S1o

cheers WF :)

Caveat: I think the work would be on advertorials for The Times and Sunday Times.

doubtless £££s tho

the closest i've ever been to working on a title i was ideologically unsympathetic to was a fill-in week on r3d p3pper when it first started -- and it wasn't the politics, which i was broadly aboard with (otherwise wouldn't have bothered replying to the ad), but the in-office banter abt pop culture: no one present had a clue

also i did a few days at WOUND CARE magazine once, despite myself being WOUND? DON'T CARE

should apply at The Wire for maximum pathos

https://i.imgur.com/mPgfVXT.jpg

:D <3

Just before I moved from London to Glasgow I did a few fill-in shifts subbing The Sun's TV mag. This was at the News International compound in Wapping - have never worked anywhere else with such tight, oppressive security arrangements. It was of course interesting in all sorts of ways, and yeah, the rates were pretty good - the Murdoch shilling basically paid my relocation expenses.

So you're saying when the revolution comes it will be difficult to storm in there and smash up all their computers, which was my revolution plan

I'm sure the security guards will recognise their common revolutionary cause with you and assist with the smashing of the presses.

ok i have applied to join the uk subs and sent an email to dominic wells via his website, which is probably bad etiquette but i couldn't find the relevant facebook post

i will phone up the spectator later in the week perhaps

lol fabled foe of the subs' desk giles coren showing his worthless ass again

stevie i got no joy from the subs_uk yahoogroup -- can you tell if it's currently active from the inside?

(i applied for membership and the application failed 14 days later, i'm assuming bcz the person who makes the decisions didn't spot it -- i will re-apply anyway)

hey! am on hols this week but will reply properly when i get back home x

the blessed return of #theabsolutegrudge :D

(ps and v unrelated: nudging stevie? i never no response from them second time of enquiring either?)

Apologies, Mark - just fired off a message to the list to find out who the admin is

cheers :)

The UK company I work for may have some freelance subbing work going in October, working on a number of different contract-client magazines. It would be short notice when pages are available to work on, and a quick turnaround would be required. You would be subbing for facts, grammar and internal consistency, rather than wholesale rewriting etc (unless the text is particularly disastrous). There might also be client changes/amends to action.

You would need to have InDesign 2020 and might be required to make minor design tweaks to layouts; there could also be subbing work on e-newsletters too, so familiarity with MailChimp and Umbraco would be a plus. The company has offices in London and Glasgow; this would all be for the Glasgow office, although obviously you can be based anywhere in the UK.

The long-term goal is to increase our pool of subbing freelancers, who at present all get fairly frequent work from us. I don't know what daily rates will be on offer - I would guess around £150 a day would be the absolute max.

If anyone is interested, please send me an email, with a very brief resume of your previous subbing work, to Axx✧✧✧.littlefi✧✧✧@thinkpublish✧✧✧.c✧.u✧ (that's 'Andrew' at the start of my email address obv).

Thanks!

LOL ILX seems to automatically censor email addresses (very wise!)

so that's

Andrew.littlefield

at 'think publishing.co.uk'

Ach, I'm booked until the end of October, and then without assignment from thereon in, but if I can be of any use in the future...

Thanks stevie, please feel free to send me over your contact details etc. We're looking at a big deadline crunch in October, and I'm sure there will be similar mad rushes in the future.