Constant Content

Apparently Constant Content is going to be bringing on new editors to help with the current backlog situation. What are some things you think new editors should know?

- Personal preferences shouldn't dictate editing. If it's not forbidden in CC's extended guidelines, ask yourself whether the edit you're asking for (or making yourself) is just a stylistic preference of yours or whether it is CC's policy.

- Review edits you make to writers' articles. I've found errors introduced into my articles on more than one occasion (i.e. there vs their).
[Found using http://copyscape.com/compare.php]

- Bullets and lists are okay.

- URLs are okay as long as there's no www in front of the URL.

What do you think new editors should know about the Constant Content platform?

- Writers pay editors' wages.

Yes, definitely needed!

They are not there to suggest a re-write. Their style may be different, doesn't always mean better.

Focus on tense, grammar, punctuation, typos.

Don't be snide in comments. Snide = attitude of superiority.

Acquaint themselves with the possible buyers and the purpose the piece might fulfill.

Ensure request didn't request specific things like first person before rejecting it.

Writing online copy is different than formal writing.

Online magazines and even print magazines often like summary lists which may repeat what's in the content. Think of when you're in a doctor's office waiting, you might not read the long print, but you'll read a list. Both are okay.

Short and concise is often better than long explanations in many cases.

Online niche writing sometimes assumes the reader knows things that don't need to be stated which is why we don't state it.

Some of us have sold hundreds of articles. Don't think of us as not knowing what we're doing (except for a random brain burb moment).

What do you think new editors should know about the Constant Content platform?


On one project I was told not to submit a new document but to make my changes on the editor's blocked in section. Is that the right thing to do?

Was just thinking also that when full rights are bought, the buyer changes the article to suit them. Viewing it that way may help an editor ease up. For instance, with a numbered list that repeats what's in the rest of the content, the buyer could be the one to opt to keep the list or not. It's not necessarily an editorial decision.

Also, EVERY call to revise something COSTS the writer time they are never paid for.

- Be open to reasonable and polite pushback. Editors are not infallible, and if a writer can point to precedent or CC policy, then that should be enough. Questioning an editor's initial comments is not a sin in and of itself.

- We do not live in the 16th century. Consider context before rejecting a piece for a single word.

- Consider that some clients want voices other than "boring professor". An article you might feel is cheeky might be exactly what a buyer is looking for. CC doesn't need to be an army of formality-bots. It gets boring fast that way. If it reads well and doesn't have anything blatantly over the line or untrue in it, accept it.

- My articles should all be accepted on the first submission, every time. They should also be promoted more heavily than anyone else's. I could use dental coverage too. These decisions might be beyond the editor level but they can be passed up the chain of command.

surely you jest with your last statement

JoyRCalderwood wrote:surely you jest with your last statement

This board really needs a facepalm emoji.

ryanhealy wrote:

JoyRCalderwood wrote:surely you jest with your last statement

This board really needs a facepalm emoji.

Here ya go:

(－‸ლ)


https://textfac.es
http://www.emojicons.com/e

HiredGun wrote:Apparently Constant Content is going to be bringing on new editors to help with the current backlog situation. What are some things you think new editors should know?

- Personal preferences shouldn't dictate editing. If it's not forbidden in CC's extended guidelines, ask yourself whether the edit you're asking for (or making yourself) is just a stylistic preference of yours or whether it is CC's policy.

- Review edits you make to writers' articles. I've found errors introduced into my articles on more than one occasion (i.e. there vs their).

- Bullets and lists are okay.

- URLs are okay as long as there's no www in front of the URL.

What do you think new editors should know about the Constant Content platform?

Must be more new editors at work again. Getting the old 'we don't allow links' rejection again. (yes you do!) (ง'̀-'́)ง

"Please follow our protocol if you must include web addresses by removing the http://www prefix. Ex: google.com (good), http://www.google.com (bad)."
https://www.constant-content.com/area/W ... e.htm#FAQs

Can we include the "www" in the URL if it is for a list of sources at the bottom of an article?

MicheleR wrote:Can we include the "www" in the URL if it is for a list of sources at the bottom of an article?

No 'live' URLs allowed within a CC submission, even within your reference section.