So I finally completed the latest issue of the newsletter, about a month late. I knew it would be delayed somewhat because the prez and the ED wouldn't get me their articles until after the spring meetings. I did everything else I could ahead of time, and was hoping to just insert their content and be finished, but it didn't work that way. About the time we returned from traveling for the meetings, I discovered my computer had a problem that required it to be sent off for repairs. I did as much as I could, and saved it all to work on at home. Then the prez finally sent his article. It was longer than I had space for, so I basically started over, working from a flash drive and a different version of the software. I scrapped a few things, moved things around, and actually came up with a better version that the original. But one of the things I could not find space for was a photo.
I shared the update version with my coworkers for their review. Both commented on the fact that the photo got cut, and I agreed that it was too bad, because it was a great photo. Then one had to comment that it was too bad that one article was so long (it was the front page article, FFS) and wondered if I could make that other thing smaller (not if I want people to be able to read it). The other asked me where I came up with the front page article anyway (it was suggested by a member).
Notice how nobody offered to change what they had submitted? Yeah, me either.
May 24, 2017
Karma
So the boss I used to complain about? The one who never did anything, or was unethical and incompetent when she did? She managed to get on the legislative radar, and the agency has been absorbed into DHS. Kim found a new position with another agency, which sounds like a great move for her. SJ actually got a position with DHS. She is gonna hate it.
June 6, 2016
Mary, Mary, Quite the B*tch
My organization publishes a quarterly newsletter for our members. My job description states that I am responsible for gathering, editing and laying out the newsletter with assistance from staff and others. Gathering consists of me reminding the board prez and the director that I need their articles, requesting the applicable content from M, the office/travel manager and others, and then filling the rest of the pages with news and content. I try not to edit the first two so that their messages have a distinct "voice". The content I provide is already edited as I write and insert it. Most of the content from M does not require editing because it just lists the information from a database. The travel section however is a freaking nightmare every time.
First of all, she sends it to me already formatted. This is a pain because it is formatted for Word, but not for the program I use to publish. So I spend too much time changing the formatting to fit the publication template. Second of all, she does not like me to edit the trip descriptions at all, even though when I do it is to make the listings uniform (heading, date, description, price, etc.) or so that I can avoid a widow or cut a line for space. You know, for pics and content more interesting than heading, date, description, price. Third, she expects me to include an entire column of content describing the travel program itself.
This last is the most annoying. First, it takes up too much space that could be used to tell or show the actual trips. Second, she uses a narrative style instead of easy to read bullet points to give basic information. It is poorly written with incomplete sentences and info like the web address and phone number buried in the middle of a paragraph. Third, one whole poorly-written paragraph is a testimonial for our travel agency. This would be less annoying if she didn't have a regular hissy fit about people trying to use our publication to get to our members.
For this last issue, she sent it to me and pointed out that she had rewritten the descriptive column. It was worse than before. I entered all of the trip listings first so I would know how much space I had to work with, and then I tackled the column. I tried to compromise, leaving some of it like it was before and adding the new content she had provided. It read OK and fit the space, but she was not happy about me changing it and let me know it.
I explained everything I said above, but stopped short of telling her that her writing was terrible. So she "tweaked it" and sent it back with the comment that it should fit the space as written, as if that was the problem. This time she included a closing and her name.
With her rewrite, she included the original trip descriptions. This time, I cut and pasted everything exactly as she had written it. The only changes I made were to the formatting so that it at least looked like it should. I did not spell check it. I did not correct her punctuation. I did not inquire about missing info on one of the descriptions. I cut and pasted everything exactly as she had written it, including her signature.She glanced at it long enough to see that I had put her column as written and never looked at the rest of it because her material doesn't need edited.
Part of me is glad that we got the issue out in time, in spite of this and several other challenges. But another part of me is angry that I put out an issue that wasn't as good as it should have been. As the editor, that is my job too. Even the board prez and the director actually want me to double-check them and make them look and sound good. Part of me hopes no one reads it that closely or thinks poorly of my editorial and publishing skills when they do. The b*tch in me dares her to say anything about the "errors" so that I can point out that they were her errors, with her signature, and that I tried several times to fix them.
This is both true and not true. I did try to fix them in a way that was satisfactory to us both. Her refusal to compromise on even one word, in spite of the fact that I am the editor and it is my job, defies logic. I keep telling myself that it is her signature on it, not mine, but that is not entirely true either.
First of all, she sends it to me already formatted. This is a pain because it is formatted for Word, but not for the program I use to publish. So I spend too much time changing the formatting to fit the publication template. Second of all, she does not like me to edit the trip descriptions at all, even though when I do it is to make the listings uniform (heading, date, description, price, etc.) or so that I can avoid a widow or cut a line for space. You know, for pics and content more interesting than heading, date, description, price. Third, she expects me to include an entire column of content describing the travel program itself.
This last is the most annoying. First, it takes up too much space that could be used to tell or show the actual trips. Second, she uses a narrative style instead of easy to read bullet points to give basic information. It is poorly written with incomplete sentences and info like the web address and phone number buried in the middle of a paragraph. Third, one whole poorly-written paragraph is a testimonial for our travel agency. This would be less annoying if she didn't have a regular hissy fit about people trying to use our publication to get to our members.
For this last issue, she sent it to me and pointed out that she had rewritten the descriptive column. It was worse than before. I entered all of the trip listings first so I would know how much space I had to work with, and then I tackled the column. I tried to compromise, leaving some of it like it was before and adding the new content she had provided. It read OK and fit the space, but she was not happy about me changing it and let me know it.
I explained everything I said above, but stopped short of telling her that her writing was terrible. So she "tweaked it" and sent it back with the comment that it should fit the space as written, as if that was the problem. This time she included a closing and her name.
With her rewrite, she included the original trip descriptions. This time, I cut and pasted everything exactly as she had written it. The only changes I made were to the formatting so that it at least looked like it should. I did not spell check it. I did not correct her punctuation. I did not inquire about missing info on one of the descriptions. I cut and pasted everything exactly as she had written it, including her signature.She glanced at it long enough to see that I had put her column as written and never looked at the rest of it because her material doesn't need edited.
Part of me is glad that we got the issue out in time, in spite of this and several other challenges. But another part of me is angry that I put out an issue that wasn't as good as it should have been. As the editor, that is my job too. Even the board prez and the director actually want me to double-check them and make them look and sound good. Part of me hopes no one reads it that closely or thinks poorly of my editorial and publishing skills when they do. The b*tch in me dares her to say anything about the "errors" so that I can point out that they were her errors, with her signature, and that I tried several times to fix them.
This is both true and not true. I did try to fix them in a way that was satisfactory to us both. Her refusal to compromise on even one word, in spite of the fact that I am the editor and it is my job, defies logic. I keep telling myself that it is her signature on it, not mine, but that is not entirely true either.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
