O Editor, Where Art Thou?

“Where have all the editors gone?” I lament, nearly every time I read a story, whether that story is a blurb about an upcoming concert in the local alt-weekly, or a long-form piece on a national outlet. Just kidding. More like, “Who the fuck read this shit before it got posted? Anyone? Who approved this?” To be clear, I’m not pining for what I feel is portrayed in film and television so often: the hard-nosed, controlling editors that shut down earnest young reporters at every turn, denying permission to break The Story – who inexplicably is wearing a contrast collar shirt and eating Chinese take-out in my mind. I’m searching for the editor who actually reads the story before the post is submitted. I’m searching for the editor who makes tough choices about journalistic ethics – an editor clearly missing in action at Grantland, when Caleb Hannan’s story about a golf putter crossed the line into outing a transgender woman known as Dr. V.

We all make mistakes in our writing. I am (first of all) not a writer, much less a journalist or an editor. I’ve never been a good speller. I’ve never had a particularly good grasp of English grammar. I tend to write with a distinctive style that might get me thrown right out of the Mayborn School of Journalism. Luckily, my professors in the School of Public Administration and Community Service don’t seem to give a shit, so I’m off the hook and never actually have to work at improving my writing (See? I just conveniently discharged concerns you may have about my writing and credibility through self-deprecation!).

I cannot catch all of the errors in my own writing, and I think everyone needs good copy editing. If I read your piece and a critical word is missing from a sentence, or a word is misspelled, or a proper noun isn’t capitalized, I don’t think you’re stupid (unless I totally do). I think someone was too lazy to actually read your piece.

Once a friend pressed me to read a review of a party by another writer in the alt-weekly he freelanced for. The review opens, “We had arrived.” I closed out the tab and said “I ain’t reading this shit,” first because I am a smug asshole, second because I don’t like that writer in the first place, and third because I knew using the passive voice in this instance was a mistake. Do I hate passive voice? No. I obviously use it extensively. It’s not necessarily wrong to use it, but it was the wrong choice in this case. You are reviewing an insane party where industry insiders are passed out on a lawn and there’s practically a champagne swimming pool and that’s your best open? Shoulda gone with “We arrived.”

These are minor complaints. Whipping out my metaphorical red pen to point out a writer’s errors gives me a certain armchair-quarterbacking satisfaction, and the true task of managing a writer and the story is something I’ll never know. Several pieces criticizing Hannan’s have already appeared. Read Maria Dahvana Headley’s here if you haven’t. I also appreciate Tracy Moore’s piece for Jezebel (though I have many issues with Jezebel itself - $10,000.00 for un-retouched Lena Dunham photos earlier this week, anyone?), in that she succinctly deconstructed the difference between confirming educational and professional credentials and making someone’s gender identity the subject of the story. Hannan’s claim that the story is a eulogy to Dr. V, and his callous attitude on Twitter following the release of the story indicate he does not understand the difference. We now know Hannan had serious ethical breach as an editor in the past (thanks to @Bro_Pair for digging that up). Ensuing discussions focus on his decisions as a reporter – but where was his editor? There’s a lot of discussion about the death of journalism, but I’m more concerned about the death of editing.

Did anyone at Grantland even read the piece? This might be slightly unfair, but as a reasonably informed reader, I am consistently amazed at posts on outlets of all sizes that seem as if they received no more than a cursory glance.

If it was read – were there no discussion of ethical issues with the piece? When did the editing occur? Was the piece we see on Grantland the final form Hannan wished to present?

We can continue criticizing Hannan and writers and reporters like him, but the focus needs to turn towards the editors themselves, and the roles they play. I get it, editor – you’re overworked and underpaid – I’m in the field of government and nonprofit management, so please don’t cry to me about it as if that’s some sort of excuse. Do better. Be better. Remember that you have a moral compass, and that you actually have ethics to follow, though they are forever incomplete and often very fuzzy.

Sadly, this particular incident – which should be a focusing event that ideally sparks discussion and change in policy and process – will probably be forgotten soon, along with Dr. V herself.