Quote:
Originally Posted by TallMomof2
4. Poor editing
|
Unfortunately, your last point, while valid, will remain with us as long as books are produced by companies that need to produce quarterly returns for shareholders and there are p-books. Publishers are unable to control distribution costs of p-books. They are also unable to control much of the production cost, especially when they have to accept returns of unsold books. Consequently, those costs that they can control -- editorial being a major one -- they squeeze for savings. Thus we end up with books edited -- assuming they are edited at all -- by low-skilled editors.
I would add that this problem is compounded by the quality of some of the publishers' inhouse editorial staff. They are not well-versed in the editing function and have low skills themselves and thus are unable to discern a good editing job from a poor editing job. In fairness, the inhouse staff also rarely has time or opportunity to improve its skill level because of the number of books they are expected to process.
At least in the U.S., and I suspect this is true elsewhere, the command of English language skills is in great decline among students at all levels of education. And as those who teach English have lesser skills, so their students have even lesser skills, and the cycle continues.
Even university presses are subject to these failings, witness the recent recall of a print run by Princeton University Press of a newly published book because of all the editorial errors. PUP ultimately claimed that it used an inexperienced editor, but that was probably the only level of editor it could get because of the low skillset among newer editors and the low pay rate presses offer.