Quote:
Originally Posted by mr ploppy
It's proof readers the tradpubs have killed off, they still use copy-editors.
|
They are using something but true copyeditors rarely. I often get calls from publishers asking me to "copyedit" a book and then they send me a list of what they want me to do and not do. When you get through the list, what they want is something quite distinct from copyediting, perhaps a bastardization of proofreading and copyediting.
But the real problem is less what they want than what they are willing to pay and whom they are willing to hire to do the work.
The pay scale is based on the lowest price the publisher would pay if the publisher put the book out for bid on the Internet and accepted bids from all interested persons. It wasn't so long ago that one publisher wanted an American who had multiple years of experience copyediting medical texts, an advanced degree, able to pass a copyediting test, demonstrable knowledge and expertise in a particular style, and several other "minimum" requirements, at the great pay rate of 75 cents per page. Based on the standard throughput for medical copyediting of 4 to 6 pages an hour, the publisher was offering an hourly rate of $3.00 to $4.50, depending on how fast you could edit.
One of the editor's responsibilities was to verify drug dosages, that is, that the dosage given in the manuscript was within the FDA-approved range. I surely would want to trust that kind of work to someone earning less than half of minimum wage; wouldn't you?
I have been told on several projects to not make any changes to anything an author has written except for obvious misspellings. The publisher called that copyediting.
My point is that it is not enough to say that publishers are hiring copyeditors. There must be an understanding of what the parameters are of the work they are hired to do and the pay they are offered to do that work.