Report Rotten Editors

I don't normally like to slag people off on the internet, but infrequently I make an exception. In this case it is deserved. It's not so much directed - as far as I'm concerned - to the individuals here, although they they certainly deserve to be mentioned - but really the group that call themselves 'editors' need to go under the spotlight.

Many editors behave the way these individuals have behaved. They have excuses - lack of time, ADD etc. - but like other human beings, when work loads increase you adapt. You deal with stress. Set boundaries if you must. Ask people to bug you less, or come in to work earlier, or delegate the fine tuning of the small stuff to someone else. Most editors get into a rut of rude negligence at some point, and a lot of writers have gotten used to it, so it gets worse. Writers tend not to kick up a fuss - they leave that to the editors. And there is the very real risk (which I am taking here) that by saying, Humansdorp, we have a problem, up to here and no further, that editors will hold it against you. Why? because they can. It's easy to be spiteful, and so sometimes they are. Sometimes they're fair - depending on how much they need to get exactly what they want from whomever is offering it.

Most good editors are intelligent, practical people. So,though I am taking a risk exposing some that might not be, I'm counting on sanity prevailing. My confidence in that sanity is at an all time low. Don't blame me. I've sent 9000 words into the ether in the last week alone. It's like tossing a stone down a deep black well. It's like the next morning and I am still waiting by the well and I still haven't heard the stone (any of those words) hit bottom.

See, the thing is, once upon a time, editors were writers too. What happened guys? I think it is a real tragedy when editors hang up their keyboards and get bogged down in everyone elses stuff. But that's not the case with the two people in this story. Writers are getting a bum deal from the very people that are supposedly representing them. It's bad enough that in SA it has taken about 15 years to get word rates to rise 50 cents (from R1.50 to R2). Why do we have to struggle through a morass of virtual vines and briar patches that is an editor's attention - just to get our stories considered? If editors practised bit of time management and set aside an hour or two at the start of each day just to acknowledge and respond to what was in their inbox, it would go a long way to soothing and smoothing ruffled feathers. But no. Instead, it's a hit and miss thing, where the writer spends weeks, and hours, doing their thing, writing something, and then waiting weeks for an editors eyeball to chance upon their email. 5 seconds is what they'll give you: a 10 word answer to your 3000 word submission. That's still okay. I can accept that. What I don't accept is no answer, and then vitriol.

The Star has fallen

On 14/04 I sent a feeler email to The Star asking if they would be interested in a story on Korea. This was about a week before I went on the trip. At that stage I had three publications interested, and right now I can say one came good on the loose agreement, pending a meeting I'll hear the results of 2nd soon, and the third is still in play. The Star though was a different kettle of fish altogether. It took weeks and weeks and many emails just to get a response, but once I took them to task for their lack of communication, I got a flurry of hate mail in a single hour on a Friday afternoon. So they obviously are capable of sparing some time (and thought) when push comes to shove.

Anyway, let's go back in time, and cut to the chase of this sad as a bog tale. After numerous follow up emails to an initial offer for content, I received this answer on 15/05.

From: Carol Lazar
Sent: 15 May 2008 10:56 AM
To: Nick Van Der Leek
Subject: RE: heart & seoul

Yes Nick
I would really like a piece on Korea. We ahve never had anything on that country. I look forward to reading it. I'm delighted about GQ - it's a good magazine.
Cheers
Carol

Then I tried to narrow down what exactly they wanted me write, which took another two weeks. Eventually I annotated my emails as IMPORTANCE: HIGH to get their attention.

From: Nick Van Der Leek
Sent: 02 June 2008 02:17 PM
To: 'Carol Lazar'
Subject: Resuscitating A Stream
Importance: High

Hi Carol

I'd like to customise a story for The Star, and in order to do so I just need a ballpark brief of what you'd be interested in. This is obviously not an undertaking from your side to commit to publishing, just a suggestion.

Please provide a suggested word count, and number of pictures you'd like. Please also select which topic/s most suits your expectations:
1) Resuscitating a stream - how Seoul spent $200 million to remove a major traffic artery in order to give life to a 600 year old stream. Historical background, equipment used and construction process, implications for urban planning and development.
2) Surfing the Korean Wave - The American dream is so passé, the Korean wave is where it's at. The good, the bad and the unexpected - what living in Korea is all about, and what to expect if you make the move.
3) Where airports go to heaven (Incheon Airport).

Thanks Carol
Nick

In June now - and Carol once again took a few seconds to respond, and when she did it was positively, but with no indication really of what she wanted me to write. When I tried to establish this shortly afterwards (about 10 minutes) Carol changed her mind, saying they didn't want any material after all. After 6 weeks this lady has a moodswing! This was in response to an email from me asking if she could spend a little time letting me know exactly what she wanted me to do. By asking this Carol said I demonstrated a 'bad attitude'.

And not long after that, this email from Seoul.

Dear all,

Hi, I hope everything's going well with you guys after you're back from Seoul to your life. Today I have a bad news, not for you, but for us and those Western journalists who have done all the documentation required for July Tour application. The Seoul Metropolitan Government has recently cancelled the third round of Press Tour for Western journalists, which was scheduled for June 30-July 5. Tours for Asian journalists for the same timeframe are progressing smoothly, on the other hand. The Seoul MG argues that Seoul Selection's poor performance, or in other words, low output of Seoul articles by Western journalists in the first and second rounds, has resulted in the cancellation.

My colleagues and I are still recovering from the shock of the cancellation. But there are other victims—30 plus journalists who have applied for June 30-July 5, and Oct. 20-25 Seoul Tours respectively. We've already announced the cancellation for the third round Tour applicants. The Seoul MG says they would evaluate our performance in late August, by Seoul articles published by the first and second Tour participants. Then it will be decided whether Seoul MG would host the Oct. 20-25 Tour for Western journalists or not.

I don't mean to pressure you. Nor do I have any means to pressure you to write. But if you simply forgot to start on writing, or put it as low priority subject, please reconsider. By trying harder to get your writings published in established media, you would contribute to bringing your colleague journalists to Seoul in October. Thank you for reading.

Best wishes,
Kay Chung
Seoul Selection

Do you see the culpability here? I did. Hence:

Hi Carol

Just a reminder that as a result of your response - (citing my bad attitude - where I drew your attention to urgently wanting to offer a story after a press tour, after countless emails following your failure to even respond to half a dozen emails) and other editors like you, western journalists (over 30 of them) have now not been invited to Seoul. Asian journalists have been invited instead. I don't blame them - the western journos now appear to have a reputation for being lazy and disinterested (see email). When time allows I would like to contact your superior at IOL/INL and let them know your culpability in this, and also how it came about that you decided you weren't even interested in receiving freelance work. It's a case of spiteful egoism on your part at its worst - and this has had consequences for many other writers now. I also want to remind you that you took over 2 months to simply respond to a prior email, which indicates a pattern of negligence.

Have a super day

Nick


Guess who comes to the rescue? Brendan Seery, The Star's Open Ed editor who writes:

Nick:

I am one of Carol's Lazar's superiors at INL and, having seen your raving, out of touch with reality letter, I can only conclude she acted correctly in not wanting to have anything to do with you.

If you are anything resembling a journalist, you would realise:

1) The editor of a publication has the final say on what goes into that publication. In this case, Carol makes the calls for Saturday Star Travel.
2) That being the case, she also gives preference to copy generated by our own staffers and freelance writers she has worked with previously.
3) In addition, she would make a call based on whether a specific country or destination had been covered recently
4) Finally, she would decide on whether the piece offered was of sufficiently high quality to be used. (Judging by your immoderate and immature rantings, I would be loathe to use any of your copy myself)

You should also realise that an editor of a travel publication is under NO OBLIGATION to take freelance copy, particularly work that was not specifically commissioned by that publication.

For you to assert - and to copy to others - that Carol Lazar is lazy and unprofessional and has damaged the prospects of Western journalists being invited to South Korea (simply because she refused to take YOUR marvellous work) is not only idiotic but it is also defamatory.

If I were you, I would go off to a quiet place and try to get back to reality.

Regards

Brendan Seery
Executive Editor: Content
The Star
JOHANNESBURG

Hey Brendan

I hope you don't mind me putting your email on my blog. I think it will serve to show exactly what we are dealing with. Would you mind? I will also be sending it (your email) to Seoul so they can see the attitude of some editors. My gripe with you, Carol and others like you is that you are not even polite enough to respond to emails. Thus the point is not even reached where material is submitted. You seem not to have grasped this epithet of information. People like me (who you sneer at and appear to believe have no talent) go around the world, working very hard, and approach you, offer work to you on a silver platter, and you don't even have the manners to acknowledge the invitation. When I tried to impress on Carol that I'd appreciate an answer to a number of emails (an answer, not permission to write anything), she went back on an email she'd just sent citing she didn't like my 'attitude'.

It's frankly disgusting behaviour. I also don't believe you are Carol's superior based on your position in the paper, and having read the content you write. Carol is based in Cape Town and works for the Saturday Star. Even so, I would like to get hold of someone much higher up - I'm sure they would find your clique's behaviour appalling, and frankly, bad for business.

It's also amusing to hear you (who pontificate endlessly over the 'real' world of advertising), giving advice on reality.

Thanks
Nick

Now note contempt and sarcasm in Seery's response:

Nick:

It would be interesting to find out if you got on that trip based on your assurance to the organisers that you WOULD get copy placed in Satstar Travel..

You may do what you want with my response to you - it is an accurate relfection of the situation.

Just one last point before I consign this whole thing to the dustbin of history - it appears that Carol is not the only one who has rejected your work (you refer to editors...) so perhaps you should engage in a little introspection.

And, trust me my friend, I have forgotten more about real journalism (and reality) than you'll ever know.

Regards

Brendan

No Brendan. I've already published a story - on Korea - in X X [a finance magazine]. And actually, if Carol checks her records, she did express an interest in a story prior to the trip. There were no obligations in any direction, but there is such a thing as manners.

The bottom line lies in bad process and bad manners from editors who believe they know it all, and can learn nothing new - like Carol and yourself. Why is it easier to publish in magazines than newspapers these days? From your email it sounds like favoritism - using freelancers that you've used before. If that is the case, inform new freelancers that you are not interested, rather than ignoring them and stringing them along indefinitely. Having been published in [X] and with [Y] on board to pitch what I have offered them, I found your (collective) behaviour unbelievably egotistical. If someone puts a few hundred rand in your hands, would you throw it away? It sounds like it. Because freelancers potentially save publications a lot of extra expense doing what they do at their own recognizance. I suspect that since you don't write out the salary slips (a very real world enterprise) you don't particularly care about the value propositions involved for your company.

Speaking of value, I'm not sure if you are aware that the Olympics are in Beijing this year, and Seoul is about as far away from Beijing as Johannesburg is from Cape Town. Your publication (or staffers working there) might have stood a good chance to be invited to Seoul themselves, to assist in Seoul's broad scheme.

Sorry but it's too late to be conciliatory. I have already forwarded an extract out of your email to Seoul and many of those 30 journalists who have had their trips cancelled. Fortunately for you I also have the manners to remove Carol's name, and your publications name from the email.

Thanks for your permission to publish your email on my blog. I also have no problem defending my position. You might find it more difficult to rationalise your position though.
Brendan Seery to me show details 1:08 PM (3 hours ago)

Let me understand this correctly: we are the direct cause of the cancellation of trips for 30 journalists (one SA newspaper which had the temerity not to respond to you).

I wouldn't go near anything which requires logic if I were you

Not very nice are they? These are unfortunately the sort of people we have to deal with. It's quite simple. You send an email offering to provide something, and someone responds saying - wow, yay, that's nice, thanks, or nay. If yay, simply say: write something on this, make it so and so long and let's see. A fifth grader could tell you that. It's a shame that instead there is a lot of other stuff going on. Editors try to find out how you got on these tours (so that they can get themselves signed up), and when they don't, they guard the gates in the name of editorial excellence.

There are a bunch of emails that I haven't even included here that are riddled with spelling errors. Even when they try to convince you of their lexical expertise they spell presumptuous presumptious. Because the people behind these publications have become picky and fussy and pedantic - to their own ego's and whims rather than to an objective standard (as in the above) - everyone actually loses. In this case The Star lose the chance to have their own staff invited to the many other tours to Seoul that they'd envisaged (or similar tours). Seoul have even offered to provide advertising around any stories that are published. But what happens? Editors like these grandstand and show how powerful (and stupid) they can be. It's just bad business and bad manners.

I find that I've stopped reading certain publications and buying others based on the sort of people I know are working there, and the extent to which they are serving their own egos. It all makes sense though. The media as a whole is delusional, and now we can see why. There's a website titled REPORT ROTTEN NEIGHBOURS. I'm going to start a blog called REPORT ROTTEN EDITORS. Watch this space!