On the face of it, subeditors ensure that articles are readable, accurate and widely read. Beyond the obvious, they also form the last line of defence between writers, editors and publishers – and the law.
To achieve their common goal they check writers’ copy for accuracy, content, grammar, and style. They cut copy to fit space, fix incorrect spelling and grammar, change copy to suit house style, check facts, write headlines and proof-read.
In essence, the sub adds the final polish to the to-be-published material. All of which brings me back to the topic of this blog: the art of the “light” sub.
Given the clear responsibility of the sub, I have often wondered how a sub differentiates between a “heavy”, or thorough, sub, and a “light” sub, that presumably entails a less-than-perfect job?
What stays, what goes and are there any guidelines? Does copy get a quick skim, ignoring double spaces, missing capitals and bad punctuation so that fact checking can be accommodated? Or perhaps attention to detail comes at the expense of fact verification?
Being the pedantic Virgo that I am, my immediate response to the “give this a light sub” instruction has always been one of wry amusement. My take is that one either subs copy properly or not at all – no half measures, no compromise.
Then again, I’m a writer first and sub second. So I thought it prudent to direct my quest for answers on this much-debated topic to a cross-section of esteemed past and present colleagues.
Here’s what they had to say:
“For me, a light sub means fixing literals, punctuation and grammar; in other words, the copy is good enough to stand on its own, bar a few minor corrections. But such copy is, alas, rare. A full sub is often known among subs as a ‘panelbeating’, and for good reason – it sometimes takes serious labour just to figure out what the writer meant, let alone rewrite the copy so that everyone else can comprehend it. Bottom line: if you need to read it twice to understand it, it needs a panelbeating. Otherwise, it’s likely a light sub.” – Willem Steenkamp
“A hideous, gurgling, strangulated sound is my first response. Saying ‘I’m only going to give it a light edit’ is like a bloke saying to a reluctant girlfriend that only runs the risk of getting ‘slightly pregnant’.
“The hideous reality of most writing that crosses an editor’s screen is that it needs to be totally redone, with the doer using full protection. The view of marketing staff and other souls involved in production is that there is nothing wrong with the writing, because they are ignoramuses and don’t know any better. If they were gynaecologists, they would not wash their hands between patients.
“All you can do is look at the amount of time you’ve been given divided by the number of words. Divide that again by the IQ of the expected audience. Divide again by your patience rating out of 1 000. That will give you a ‘light edit number’, which is the number of errors you may eliminate. These will be only the most glaring errors. If the final number you have is in the minus category, that means you need do nothing substantial to the document at all. You only have to change the font so it looks like you’ve done something.
“Where your ‘light edit number’ is in the plus rather than minus category, corrections will include errors of meaning created by dangling modifiers and, in formal writing, the addition of subjects and/or finite verbs to sentences which have been stupidly liberated from such Victorian fetters.
“A proper edit would include checking facts, but you won’t have time for anything other than changing things you already KNOW are wrong. Get rid of only those errors that annoy you most. Other people (even surprisingly intelligent and so-called educated ones) won’t know the difference.” – Mairi-Ann Young
“A ‘light sub’? What is it (or isn’t it)? And, more importantly, what’s the intention behind using these words?
“In my view, it’s a misleading term – a piece needs to be edited, not sort-of-edited, or somewhat-edited. There are no degrees of applying your mind; you either do the job properly or you don’t.
“I think editing jobs are often accompanied by the words ‘light sub’ to try keep the subeditor in a somewhat agreeable mood. Or because a project manager (really, really) hopes it’ll be a quick job and not burden project hours (when, more often than not, the opposite holds true).
“In reality, a ‘light sub’ can only be determined after the fact – generally after working on a piece that’s well written and didn’t need too much massaging.
“So, what exactly is a ‘light sub’, you ask? It’s one of a subeditor’s most disliked terms.” – Keith Nicholls
“In a literal sense I’d say it would mean just checking for spelling, punctuation and any glaring errors, but no in-depth research or rewriting.” – Allyson Howden
So there you have it folks, unashamedly naked and exposed by the experts: the much-maligned and oft-abused “light” sub.
Don’t miss next week’s topic: mastering the “quick read”.