P3D Re: Advice for editors and members

[roberts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (John W Roberts)]

>Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 18:53:34 -0600
>From: Tom Deering <tmd@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: P3D Re: Advice for editors and members

>Quoting Tom Deering, George A. Themelis said:

>>>It's certainly NOT the editor's job to track down
>>>writers and stories.
>>
>>Oh, yes, it is!  I have a bit of editing experience myself (nothing
>>compared to SW's 5000 copy circulation, more like 125) and have
>>interacted with editors of a few stereo magazines and I can see
>>that the editor's job is exactly this:  Track down writers and
>>stories.  And email has done this job MUCH easier!

>The editor's job is to transform the scribblings of his often amateur
>writers into readable form.  This involves a complex mixture of typography,
>proofreading, photography, production, distribution.  Sure, an editor has
>to cajole his writers and other volunteer staff, but that's hardly his
>primary job.

>...A newsletter is the voice of the membership.  It's not the editor's fault
>if the members have nothing to say.

>An editor's job is to edit--hence the name.  The role described above is
>"babysitter."

And don't forget, an editor's responsibilities include shouting
"Great Caesar's Ghost!" two or three times every half hour, 
maintaining a lifelong and unshakeable enmity toward Spiderman,
and explaining to Kolchak that the story can't be run because
the (stereo) photos of Dracula didn't turn out. :-)

But seriously, you appear to have left out some of the traditional activities
an editor might engage in, such as reading "letters to the *editor*,"
and writing *editorials*. In addition, especially in a small publication,
the person who is editor might also be "wearing other hats", accomplishing
several of the traditional roles of the publication, in which it's a fine
semantic point to say "the editor isn't doing it, the person who solicits
articles is doing it", if both of these roles are being filled by the
same person.

It would be interesting to find out whether there's any solid evidence that
the traditional organizational structure for running a publication is the
best of all possible structures. If not, perhaps some shifting of the
traditional roles might be warranted in particular circumstances.

John R


------------------------------