This is a great question. I don’t do a lot of direct working with writers these days but as a top editor, I think a lot about how to help other editors be better, and I can talk about how I’ve approached hands-on editing throughout my career. (Thread!) 1/14 https://twitter.com/kublakhanya/status/1295337139341754368

For context, I spent the first half of my career in teen and women’s magazines and then have transitioned into digital, so my experience is primarily service journalism, with a heavy dose of personal essays and a dash of medical and investigative. 2/14

On my first pass on a piece, I do almost no line editing. It’s not time yet. First pass is for asking lots of questions: Tell me more about this. You say that x is true, can you give more proof? What about that other thing? Why is this so? Why? Why? 3/14

Of course if I see a major structural issue and can visualize a solution, I tell the writer what I want them to do. And if I need specific information in order for the piece to fit my publishing needs, I tell them that too. 4/14

But a lot of that first pass is for asking questions that I hope will light the way for the writer to find their own answers and solutions. 5/14

If I do make line edits, rather than redlining, I’ll tend to make suggestions, eg “This transition is a bit abrupt, it could use one or two more beats.” Sometimes I’ll give an example of the kind of thing I’m after, but usually with the note “or your better version!” 6/14

Now, “asking lots of questions and letting the writer find their own way” can be at odds with “respect the writer’s time and don’t make them do multiple revisions.” Writers aren’t paid enough these days for you to keep sending the copy back with more questions over and over. 7/14

So learning to ask the right questions to spark the right result quickly, and/or knowing when to ask and when to just tell the writer what to do, are really important muscles to develop as an editor. 8/14

It’s also important to develop a sense of which writers appreciate probing questions and back-and-forth, and which ones are more utilitarian and just want to be told what to do (both kinds of writers are valuable!) 9/14

Second round is when I do alllllll the line editing. But my aim is always that the edits be seamless: No matter how heavily I edit something, the writer should look at it and not be able to tell what I changed. Sometimes I’m better at this than others! 10/14

Then in magazines, I would have to also incorporate what my top editors asked for, and then the changes from the fact-checker. And then cut those carefully crafted 2800 words down to 1200 to fit the layout because the designer wanted a full bleed photo 11/14

In digital there are fewer steps and fewer length constraints, but it can make us sloppy: not editing as carefully, allowing bloated or repetitive copy, or conversely thin or underreported copy because we have to publish something NOW. 12/14

That said, there are many fantastic, thoughtful, rigorous, sensitive editors who have come up in digital, so don’t listen to the folks who complain that “kids these days don’t know how to edit!” There are sloppy editors and great editors in every generation and medium. 13/14

OK apparently I wrote an essay instead of a Twitter thread. It’s late and I have to get offline, but feel free to reply with questions if you have them and I’ll try to answer in the morning. 14/fin