On 10/31/07, Janani Gopalakrishnan writetojanani@gmail.com wrote:
Frankly, we freelancers have a bit of power in our hands in that respect -- to say "NO!" We may not be able to avoid such cuts by the uber-editor. But when that happens, we can always go back to the editor and say, "Next timeat you do that, I won't write for you!"
Well said! :-) It always feels good when i see that people are willing to take a stand to do the right thing :-)
Or, where we think that won't have any effect, just ignore the publication. I might not be a *big* writer and my cold shoulder might not even be noticed, but at least, as a writer, I have the satisfaction of ensuring quality.
i would say its more about ethics rather than quality in this case.
One publication I stopped writing for (because they randomly snipped paras -- I waited till two such instances, to give them the benefit of doubt) although the name would have looked good in my resume, is The Hindu. And one publication where I've not had that problem with is Linux For You and its sister publications -- they've (almost) always cooperated and sent me the final draft for checking (post editing) -- so there aren't any rude surprises when I see the work in print!
This is indeed VERY useful information and its wonderful that you are sharing it with all of us. Thanks!!!
i sincerely hope people - ESPECIALLY ``experienced" people who keep talking to the media are listening.
And frankly, the interviewees also have a role to play here. Every time they find a misinterpretation by the author, they *must* write to the editors and bring it to their notice -- because, whether it was the author's mistake or the editor's random editing, they will at least know that interviewees/readers object to such practices!
i second that.
It's like the choice between FOSS and proprietory. Here, it's a choice between quality and money/reputation.
Err... i wouldn't use that analogy as FOSS - Free and Open Source Software is literally translated as being about about Freedom and Quality.
Regards,
- vihan