WORD to the wise; when trying to recruit a brilliant copy editor don't ask for a 'strictler for facts' in your brief. This will make those truly OCD copy monsters (the best sort of proof readers) squirm with discomfort.
And yes, this is a true story!
I worked as a sub editor for some time and during that period I learnt that the best copy editors work with capable journalists. Literally just capable, not brilliant. The ability to write two paragraphs without changing tenses eight times will greatly alleviate a copy editor's work load. The ability to spell everyday words such as National Geographic (and not National Georgraphic) will really lessen the tension in your average editor's life.
So when HR posts a brief that they got from an editor (ahhhh yes, you can bet your bottom dollar!) with a spelling error then you know you are in for a nightmare. Actually let me rephrase that: I'd like to say 'spelling error' but let's face it, 'strictler' is not a word. I won't confine that mistake to the realm of spelling, I'll let it ooze over into the realm of, ahh you know...life in general. Seriously interwebz, if you could see my face right now... I look like I have a foul smell stuck to my face.
So of course, for the sake of brevity, I replied to the lady in question and pointed out that 'strictler' is not a word. I don't expect a 'thank you'. It's eminently more possible that I shall receive a 'tank you'.
Don't misunderstand me, I am NOT a pedant. I am not some letter-writing maniac who complains about every mistake and is a complete stickler for facts (see what I did there?). NO! I just have a hard time coming to terms with someone trying to recruit a proof reader when they can't spell. How do they propose to test the mettle of their applicants? Because clearly Microsoft has failed them already.
It's a tough time out there folks...yes it is.
No comments:
Post a Comment