Proof Pros: what should copyeditors and proofreaders be talking about more?

The questions keeping the editorial community up at night go far beyond grammar and spelling. Seven copyeditors and proofreaders unpack some of the most pressing ethical matters of our profession and their impact on us and our clients.

When I asked the Proof Pros to answer this question, I anticipated that AI would be a common theme. I therefore asked the writers to pick a specific angle if they wanted to tackle that topic. In the event, though, the Proof Pros all found completely different areas to focus on, and AI (almost) doesn’t get a look in!

So, if you’re sick of AI dominating every conversation and would quite like editors to go back to the numerous other practical, ethical and emotional questions they wrestle with every day, this article is for you.

From ethical selling to cognitive load and from remuneration and recognition to the various vulnerabilities editors and authors might feel, here’s what seven highly experienced editors think the editorial community should be talking about more.

Andrew Hodges: 'It’s important not to sell beautiful lies to new editors or authors'

Ethical selling is a biggie! Everybody knows that there’s a lot of member churn in the editorial community. After all, there’s a low barrier to entry: you just need a laptop and some basic marketing skills and you can set up shop as an editor or proofreader. Getting the hang of the industry takes much longer, though.

What this means is that there’s a big market in selling courses and digital products to new authors and also people considering an editorial career – the beginner market is also a significant source of income for editorial organizations selling courses.

It’s important, then, not to sell beautiful lies to new editors about how you can spend your days earning six figures while reading novels in the bath, or how you can use the latest technological innovation to triple your editing speed. The same applies when marketing editorial services to authors.

Publishing is a bizarre industry, in that you need to be immersed in it for quite a while to figure out its nuts and bolts and separate the buzz from the substance. While scams do exist, especially for new authors looking for agents and publisher opportunities, there is a larger, fuzzy area of ignorance that some providers operate in: for example, offering an author a light copyedit when a manuscript critique would be the appropriate service to provide.

Some editors will argue that those buying services are solely responsible for the decisions they make, and that all clients should do their due diligence. But if we’re positioning ourselves as experts who also care about the reputation of the industry as a whole, then I believe we have a duty to do better and have more conversations about this difficult topic (difficult because it can impact our bottom line) – and truly serve authors.

Debbie Emmitt: 'Normalise the sensation of impostor syndrome for yourself and others'

I’d welcome more honest discussions about imposter syndrome. Many novice editors and proofreaders carry this weight (to be expected to a degree), but they may not realise experienced editors aren’t immune to it either.

Since becoming a freelance editor seven years ago, I’ve worked up to CIEP’s Advanced Professional membership level and given conference talks and webinars. I’ve worked on 100+ books and millions of words of other content. I’ve completed training courses and other professional development. You’d think I’d be confident in my skills and enjoy my experienced position.

Nope! Or at least, not all the time.

There’s still a voice in my head that often tells me I’m doing it wrong, I need to do more, I’m not the ‘real deal’. I’ve learnt to ignore that voice for the most part, because the rational part of my brain points to all I’ve achieved, the lovely testimonials I’ve received and the awards my clients have won. However, it still catches me unawares, especially when launching a new service or venturing outside my comfort zone, and I know this is the case for many fellow editors.

No matter what stage you’re at in your editing career, here are some ways to prepare for, and deal with, imposter syndrome:

• Keep your favourite testimonials – those that give you a warm glow – in an accessible place (digital or physical) to read in times of doubt.
• Record the achievements and milestones of your editing journey (training, professional memberships, large and/or favourite projects, awards etc.) and refer to these regularly.
• Pinpoint your unique selling point (USP). What do (or could) you offer that no one else can? Get inspiration from previous jobs, skills acquired through hobbies, personal experience. If you see yourself as unique, you’ll be less likely to compare yourself to others.
• Be honest about imposter syndrome. Post about it on your socials and your website. This normalises the sensation, for yourself and others, and makes you realise it’s your brain playing tricks on you, rather than reality.

So, next time imposter syndrome comes a-knockin’, send it packin’!

Ayesha Chari: 'Nurturing editors in the shadows repeatedly keeps whole communities from the table'

I have a purpley-pink three-in-one all-weather jacket that’s been my second skin for twelve years. Worn to frayed seams, collar and cuffs greyed beyond washing, it guards me and my worldly possessions – keys, wallet, phone, Vaseline, kid’s snacks, pebbles and conkers – fiercely yet gently. It – yes, the jacket – knows when to leave me alone, let me grow, hold me tight; when to support me, paint brightly over self-doubt; how to keep pace on a walk or hike, sit patiently through decision-making, even prepare me to meet the world. Yet, I’ve never acknowledged its presence or service.

Quite like editors* and editing.

Ask me how I know? I’ve spent twenty-one years practising doing for an author, their text and their audience everything that my jacket does for me and more, quietly, invisibly. It’s what all professional editors aspire to. Invisibility is the editorial community’s superpower. But editing, as Dr Cathy Hannabach’s keynote address at the 2023 EFA conference highlighted, ‘is a crucial way we collaboratively build more just futures’, and I wholly agree. Does that then not make it imperative to acknowledge editors and their labour?

Acknowledgement is not solely about spotlighting but about community-building. It is about growing the circle and paying it forward, collectively. And about valuing the different skills and craft, all the cogs and springs, that make a publication – book or brochure, webpage or comic strip – complete, individually. Equating good editing with invisibility may mark peak praise for an author, but nurturing editors in the shadows repeatedly keeps whole communities from the table even before they’ve reached it. It shouldn’t need pointing out that the impact is magnified multifold for historically marginalized and underrepresented communities worldwide. Publishers, project managers, team leaders, writers, anyone working with an editor – all have a responsibility for recognizing one of their own.

I believe this is something the editorial community and all its collaborators need to be reflecting on and opening conversations about.

* I use the term to include developmental, substantive, line and language editors, and particularly copyeditors and proofreaders, who tend to be conveniently made invisible.

Amanda George: 'Reviewing my mistakes has allowed me to get a sense of perspective'

I think we should normalise that editors, despite our remit, are human. And humans are not perfect. One of my biggest regrets is my business name: Perfect Words by Amanda George!

Human brains are not designed for proofreading. They process words rather than individual letters, which is why proofreading is so tiring. In my 16 years as a freelance editor, I have made a few mistakes, especially in the early days. And they used to haunt me. But reviewing those mistakes, and why they happened, has allowed me to get a sense of perspective – and forgive myself.

Here are a few other reasons why we might err:

• A limited client budget
• A small project timeline
• An incomplete brief or style sheet
• A lack of editorial experience and training
• A bad day – we all have them

So, should people still use proofreaders and copy-editors?

Absolutely! Because editors love words – and we are trained to use them well. We love order – and consistency. And our job (and joy) is to help our clients find the words to engage and inspire their audience, to use those words correctly, and to present their very best self. We might not guarantee perfection, especially on larger projects, but I think we can come pretty close.

Importantly, the human element is key to any collaboration. Humans love to bond, to form connections, to find allies. And an editor – while not faultless – is the perfect ally and confidence booster in any writing project.

Lisa de Caux: 'Editing is a vulnerable experience for authors'

I think we should talk more about the emotional investment in editing, from the author’s perspective and from the editor’s perspective.

What do I mean by emotional investment? The time, energy, and feelings that are devoted to a book.

Starting late 2024, I ran a questionnaire for first-time authors, and I shared the research in March 2025. The key takeaway from my research was that editing is a vulnerable experience for authors. An author typically cares deeply about their book, to the point where its progress towards publication affects their emotions.

A first-time author’s experience with an editor can shape their entire perspective on the publishing process. A first editing experience can determine whether an author embraces professional editing in the future or avoids it altogether. And it was clear that one size did not fit all.

My key finding was that trust is critical to the author’s emotional investment in editing.

I’m so deeply invested in this subject that I am kicking off a companion questionnaire to understand the emotional investment in editing for editors. I’ve been moved to tears during an edit such that I have to go back and edit the relevant section again to make sure I haven’t missed anything… And that’s just me, so I’m expecting the results of this companion questionnaire to vary wildly too!

If you’d like to participate, please do email me and I’ll send you the details.

Melanie Thompson: 'I can almost feel the spinning beach-ball of my brain buffering frantically'

Having mentioned ‘cognitive load’ in a discussion among editorial colleagues recently, I felt the need to bring it up again here. So I sat down to draft something, but my head was still buzzing with thoughts of a particularly tricky sentence I had been grappling with earlier in the day.

That’s one example of how you might be affected by cognitive (over)load.

Cognitive load is more usually talked of by teachers and psychologists who are involved in designing learning materials. The basis of cognitive load theory is that working memory can only hold on to a certain number of thoughts at a time. Sounds familiar?

Editing – with or without recourse to a bunch of useful tools such as search, macros and online dictionaries – involves taking in information (words + meaning) and holding them in the front of the mind while analysing phrases, sentences, paragraphs and chapters. How often do you read a phrase or fact and think ‘I’m sure I saw something like that three pages ago’ and scoot back to check? At least, that’s the way my editing brain works. If someone then asks me a question about a different task – ‘What’s for dinner?’ for example – I can almost feel the spinning beach-ball of my brain buffering frantically, trying to extract an answer from the unrelated jumble of information I’ve been holding on to for the past hour.

But being interrupted or taking a break is as crucial to the editing day as the ‘sprints’ of focused work that fill up the working memory. Who doesn’t return, refreshed, to their desktop and quickly spot something that had slipped by or needed another read over?

Which brings us to the other topic the editorial community should be talking more about: our daily capacity for solid work and how that relates to the amount we charge clients.

But the ‘full up’ sign is pinging in my cartoon eyes, so I’ll have to come back to that another day.

Sally Asnicar: 'We must advocate for our profession'

I’ve chosen a topic that I believe is important, ongoing, and is especially affected by AI: fair* remuneration for the qualified, skilled professionals we are, and the value we bring.

I left a well-paid career in the late 1990s to become a stay-at-home mum. Later, when I became a work-from-home proofreader, impostor syndrome and lack of ‘skin in the game’ meant I charged a low rate to attract clients and gain experience. I joined Editors NSW and at a networking lunch, a senior editor chastised me for ‘devaluing’ our profession with my measly rate.

She had a point. I had a double degree in Japanese and Politics; during my career, writing, editing and proofreading had been part of my daily remit; and I had completed two years of copyediting and proofreading courses. So, I raised my rate, terrified I would lose clients and no longer attract new ones.

Surprisingly, my client base continued to grow, even when I raised my rate every 12 months. Clearly, my rate was not the ‘why’ clients hired me.

This year, when I told clients I was retiring and had arranged replacement editors, a few said they would be handling their proofreading ‘in-house’. This is troubling, as I strongly suspect ‘in-house’ means ‘relying on AI’ instead. It doesn’t bode well for the quality of their future publications.

As I exit this profession I love, I’m saddened that editors’ client bases and workloads are diminishing, while new opportunities are becoming scarcer and remuneration is stagnating.

As for AI. It’s a tool that can assist with writing and editing, but it can never replace the skills and experience of a human editor, nor grasp the nuances of language, emotion, timing, plain language, and … brevity! ‘Pay peanuts, get monkeys’ (or AI). The editorial community should be talking about how to educate clients to recognise our value, and advocate for fair remuneration for our credentials, skills and experience.

* IPEd has developed ‘fair hourly pay rates’ for self-employed editors and their clients: https://www.iped-editors.org/about-editing/editors-pay-rates.

The Proof Pros are all independent contributors. Each person's words are their own and are not necessarily endorsed by the other contributors.