When an editor changes your article into something else

nerdyglam said:

I wrote a personal essay for a site, and they changed a few details.

I've had my work edited before, but this time it bothers me a lot because they basically added things that didn't happen. And the worst part is it's turned into something I would have been embarrassed to even write about.

Ugh. Has this happened to anyone else before?

Click to expand...

I've had this happen to me twice in my freelancing career. Each time, there were paragraphs excised and NEW paragraphs (not written by me) inserted. I was not given any warning or indication this was happening and didn't find out until the articles came out.

How did I react? Well, I was extremely pissed off, as I'm sure you might imagine. With the first article, I called the editor and asked why he'd changed it without conferring with me first. He was imperious and said that's what an editor does and that I should "educate" myself on editorial duties. Of course, I disagreed and said he could've had the decency to bounce it back to me first and have ME do the changes! That resulted in his hanging up on me. I vowed never to send him any future work, and within six months, the entire magazine had been sold to someone else.

With the second article, my byline was removed as well as new paragraphs inserted. Rather than waste my time complaining to the editor, I again decided to seek greener pastures. Not unexpectedly, that magazine, too, had fallen on hard times and now has a different editor.

When you're a freelancer, you'll undoubtedly run into situations such as these. There are many editors who respect freelancers...and, conversely, there are many who have absolutely no respect for freelancers and treat them accordingly. When this happens, I've found it best to move on. That's what's we're all about, anyway...moving on. Seek and ye shall find! Good luck!

Rod

nerdyglam said:

My boyfriend wants me to call them and ask them to take the story down or at least ask them to remove my byline and picture (which they grabbed from another site).

Click to expand...

Did they ask your permission to use that picture? Because that's a potential copyright violation.

nerdyglam said:

No, they didn't. They didn't ask for me to supply any pictures, so I was surprised to see my picture on the site.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't bother dealing with them anymore, even if they did use your picture. Unless the picture belonged to you, it's not necessarily a violation of your copyright. Be that as it may, consider this a learning experience in your long and hopefully mostly happy career as a freelancer. There have been many disappointing moments for me, and I've toyed with the idea of making a big noise...but, in the end, I asked myself: how will that benefit me or my career? So, the best thing is to pack up, exit with her cape flying dramatically, and go on to the next challenge!

I would be pretty angry. I've never had it happen to me with an entire article but I have been misquoted multiple times. That really pissed me off. If I give you one sentence then you can use that sentence. Don't make up your own and put my name on it.

I write nonfiction and this has not bothered me much. I try to be easy to work with, and I understand having artistic integrity but at the end of the day they are the ones paying for it and they are my client. If they want a sentence changed that is their choice. I see myself as a carpenter building some cabinets, if they want them to look a certain way it is their choice.

Now, I have had sentences rewritten, even titles changed. Titles annoy me because I do take pride in a title, that is the best part of writing for me, but oh well.

I even had an editor go so far as to attribute a quote to someone that had previously been my writing. This was for journalistic writing. They must have known what they were doing because the original piece never had quotes there. The guy spoke English as a second language and was none the wiser.. it didn't change the meaning of what he actually did say.. but I was a bit surprised at the ethics of it. I thought quotes were the sacred cow of journalism, never to be forged.

So I guess I just roll with it. But that is not to say I don't get annoyed when editors try to take things in a dumb direction. Or rewrite otherwise good writing. Especially when what they replace it with isn't any better, or is worse. I can usually recognize when I push the limits of what is a creative turn of phrase, and if the editor takes it out I see it must not have landed with them.. as opposed to when it is just a certain way of saying something that they rephrase but isn't any better than the original.

When an editor starts putzing around with your work and changing it to the degree where you're uncomfortable and unhappy, then you should definitely bring the matter up to him/her. Otherwise, you'll find that they'll continue to alter your work. It's my feeling, based upon personal, painful experience, that when such things happen, they won't stop until you stop them. Removing bylines is a big no-no, but it happens. Changing titles is annoying, but that happens quite often. Tweaking a line here or there is acceptable, but when paragraphs are excised and new writing inserted, well, you must draw the line. When does it stop being your work? That's the question you've got to ask yourself. Freelance writing should be fun and rewarding. If it isn't and only adds to your angst, then it's time to pull up stakes and find a new venue, where you're treated with respect.

I've had it happen, and wasn't really happy about it, but I'm with Rennet here. As long as I got paid for the work I did, it's up to the client what they want to do with it. My part in the transaction is done. It's up to me whether or not to work with this particular client again, and whether or not to use the clip in my portfolio. If I don't like what the client did with my work, I'll use my pre-edited copy to show other potential clients.

I think it is different that this was a personal essay and not an article. Other people may construe these fictionalized events as having happened for real. The picture and name will both match. I'm questioning whether bounds of libel or slander have been crossed.

In general, whomever took the photo owns the rights to it.

I'm voting for contacting them, especially if you feel the changes they made reflect poorly on you or people you care about. If you do so, try to be professional and detached about it. Keep your request simple without a lot of explanation - "The essay you posted plays with the facts in a way that I can't ethically have my name associated with. Please remove the piece and let me know how to return payment. Thank you." Professional but assertive. Good luck.

Melina said:

I've had it happen, and wasn't really happy about it, but I'm with Rennet here. As long as I got paid for the work I did, it's up to the client what they want to do with it. My part in the transaction is done. It's up to me whether or not to work with this particular client again, and whether or not to use the clip in my portfolio. If I don't like what the client did with my work, I'll use my pre-edited copy to show other potential clients.

Click to expand...

Unless you've signed a contract that gives the publisher full rights to the article and/or story, then the work doesn't belong to them. It belongs to you, and they're essentially using it. If they change the work to the point where you're dissatisfied, you'd be remiss not to bring it to their attention. After all, it's your work, and the least the editor could've done is bounce it back to you for edits--especially if the edits change, in your view, the "tone" of the article.

yendor1152 said:

Unless you've signed a contract that gives the publisher full rights to the article and/or story, then the work doesn't belong to them. It belongs to you, and they're essentially using it. If they change the work to the point where you're dissatisfied, you'd be remiss not to bring it to their attention. After all, it's your work, and the least the editor could've done is bounce it back to you for edits--especially if the edits change, in your view, the "tone" of the article.

Click to expand...

'Changing the tone' is the key point I think. If an editor wants to shuffle some thing around or reword a sentence, that is their right. If they want to put ideas in your mouth that you never spoke, that is ok to be upset about.

I don't agree that commissioned work is work is equivalent to a rental. You aren't creating that specific piece for yourself, at least in nonfiction, you are doing it to the specs of your client. If it happens to be especially lucrative or if you want to resell it, you usually gain rights to keep it after a certain period, but the original work is usually not done for your own pleasure.

I think opinions on this will vary quite a bit depending on the type of piece. Like has been mentioned a personal essay is much more of a no-no to edit.. the point of that type of piece is to hear purely the author's voice.

In either case major changes should be worked through beforehand. The final copy I've seen printed is always new to me in some minor ways, but if there had been a major reworking I would be upset. After all my name is attached to it.

Rennet said:

'Changing the tone' is the key point I think. If an editor wants to shuffle some thing around or reword a sentence, that is their right. If they want to put ideas in your mouth that you never spoke, that is ok to be upset about.

I don't agree that commissioned work is work is equivalent to a rental. You aren't creating that specific piece for yourself, at least in nonfiction, you are doing it to the specs of your client. If it happens to be especially lucrative or if you want to resell it, you usually gain rights to keep it after a certain period, but the original work is usually not done for your own pleasure.

I think opinions on this will vary quite a bit depending on the type of piece. Like has been mentioned a personal essay is much more of a no-no to edit.. the point of that type of piece is to hear purely the author's voice.

In either case major changes should be worked through beforehand. The final copy I've seen printed is always new to me in some minor ways, but if there had been a major reworking I would be upset. After all my name is attached to it.

Click to expand...

It's been my experience that very little freelance work is "commissioned." What I've done mostly is approach a magazine with an idea I'm developing to see if they're interested. If they are, I send it their way. But, after publication, the article's mine and can be used somewhere else, if I choose. I don't have to wait a "certain period" before doing that, either. First-time rights means exactly what it implies. For example, if I'm interviewing a movie star and feel such-and-such magazine might be interested, I'll give them a holler. But after the interview's published, it's mine...and I can re-edit, update and retitle it for publication elsewhere.

There have been some assignments from magazines, true--but those are few and far between. Usually, a contract is signed, with everything clearly spelled out. When I first started writing for Fangoria magazine, I always signed a contract...but not anymore. I've been freelancing since 1984, and for the most part, the assignments are self-generated, and the rights revert back to me once the piece has seen print. After that, I can do whatever I want with it.

yendor1152 said:

It's been my experience that very little freelance work is "commissioned." What I've done mostly is approach a magazine with an idea I'm developing to see if they're interested. If they are, I send it their way. But, after publication, the article's mine and can be used somewhere else, if I choose. I don't have to wait a "certain period" before doing that, either. First-time rights means exactly what it implies. For example, if I'm interviewing a movie star and feel such-and-such magazine might be interested, I'll give them a holler. But after the interview's published, it's mine...and I can re-edit, update and retitle it for publication elsewhere.

There have been some assignments from magazines, true--but those are few and far between. Usually, a contract is signed, with everything clearly spelled out. When I first started writing for Fangoria magazine, I always signed a contract...but not anymore. I've been freelancing since 1984, and for the most part, the assignments are self-generated, and the rights revert back to me once the piece has seen print. After that, I can do whatever I want with it.

Click to expand...

I think you misunderstand me. A work can still be "commissioned" if you are the one initially coming up with the idea of it and pitching it to a magazine.

And by certain period of time, I mean often a piece won't publish for months after the final draft is sent in. Since you are giving first rights you can't sell it until it is published. Other times the buyer retains rights for a specific time period after publication.

Like you said you can re-edit and publish elsewhere.. it is my opinion if you have a buyer willing to pay good money, it is best to sell and not worry too much what they want to do with your product. My only concern is if it were to become so bad I wouldn't want my name attached to it, but that is a pretty distant line to cross.

Of course, I meant the rights reverted back to the author after the piece is published. I clearly stated that in the message prior to yours, so I'm scratching my head as to why you'd think I misunderstood you. If someone wants to have a healthy career as a freelancer, they should always wait until after the article sees print. Then, they can do whatever with and to it.

Believe it or not, I actually do understand what "commissioned" means. But whatever the case, unless it's specifically geared for that publication, and other rights are spelled out in the contract, the written piece reverts to the ownership of the author following publication. And he/she can then farm it out accordingly.

It's important to have integrity as a writer. To me, that means caring about what you've written. If it doesn't bother you to have editors butcher your work or change it in any significant way because, hey, they "bought it," I must respectfully disagree.

Oh, one of those.. carry on

Rennet said:

Oh, one of those.. carry on

Click to expand...

Is that your way of being dismissive? Or just rude?

nerdyglam said:

Ugh. Has this happened to anyone else before?

Click to expand...

A fair number of times. I cashed the check and wrote another piece.

You're going to get edited, you're going to get reviewed and you'll occasionally get ridiculed. Welcome to the arts. You can choose to complain, becoming the stubborn writer nobody will work with or you can take the pay and move on. Neither choice is correct for everyone or in every circumstance.

When I wrote articles freelance, I got to the point where I rarely read the finished piece. On several occasions I participated in a Letters to the Editor response on an article, sometimes clarifying what was meant after the editor butchered it, but I never put the editor or publisher in a bad light. That and always meeting a deadline are what keep you employed.

I stopped doing most of these types of articles when markets dried up (blogs rule the world now...) and when I realized I could be paid better doing something else.

Jeff