Enforcing AP style, active voice, etc.

I'm definitely listening to him. I somewhat agree the onus is on the desk, but believe a writer should strive to write clear, clean copy all the time. We're all associate editors at my pub, and at times, edit freelance copy first before it goes to the group editor, my boss. So I'm responsible for enforcing style as well.

 

I know. But three points:

1.) There is a breed of copy editor that can't see the forest for the trees, and you don't want to be that person. If you have 10 minutes to work a story, the stylebook ought to way down the list after factual accuracy, news judgment, making the story flow. Style isn't unimportant, but it is least important.

2.) Some copy editors, especially at papers that don't treat copy editors well, develop a comfort zone of just cleaning the copy because it is safer, non-confrontational. An early mentor used to tell me, "Stop processing the copy, challenge it."

3.) There are two kinds of rules-breakers, those who are ignorant and those who do it because they're not going to let a book override their good judgment. The best stylebook I saw said the stylebook is not meant to substitute for common sense. Let the writer break the rule if changing it is going to make it read like shit.

 

i said if i didn't know you better. also, i agree with all your points, esp. no. 3.

and the level you equate obsessing and the degree some people around here equate obessing are two way different things.

 

Sidebar: I obsess about the SHIFT key.

 

Certainly, it is up to the desk to catch style and grammar miscues in copy, no matter how big or small they are. But it is also the writer's job to not make those mistakes and know the style rules.
To just say style doesn't it matter and that it's the desk's job to catch those things is passing the buck, and it shows a laziness that will come out in other parts of their job, as well.

 

bite me fishboi.