Category Archives: News

Definite articles: AI

Welcome to ‘Definite articles’, our pick of recent editing-related internet content, most of which are definitely articles. This time, our theme is the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on editing and proofreading. It’s a hot topic of conversation among editorial professionals, which is why some of the links in this article were sourced from a CIEP forum thread about ChatGPT. Thank you to the CIEP members who shared them.

Because nothing related to discussions about AI can be guaranteed a long shelf life, you should know that this edition of ‘Definite articles’ was put together at the beginning of June 2023. It covers:

  • What’s been happening?
  • What can AI actually do?
  • How can editorial professionals move forward with AI?

What’s been happening?

On 30 November 2022, the AI chatbot ChatGPT was released by OpenAI. Since then, people who work with words, who include editors, proofreaders and writers, have had the unnerving feeling that the fundamentals of what they do might change, at least in some areas. If you haven’t been keeping a close eye on events, Forbes has written a short history of ChatGPT and two professors have summarised some of the implications of ChatGPT in usefully easy-to-understand terms. You can get an overview of Microsoft’s Copilot, an AI assistance feature being launched this summer, from CNN and Microsoft itself.

As well as the obvious nervousness about whether AI would replace various categories of worker, concerns were quickly raised about the effects of AI on assessing student work and what AI might mean for copyright.

By late spring 2023, loud noises were being made about regulation of AI. As lawmakers in Europe worked on an AI Act, workers in the UK reported that they would like to see the regulation of generative AI technologies.

It’s a subject that’s currently being written and thought about on a daily, if not hourly, basis. But, in practice, and at this point in time, what can AI actually do?

What can AI actually do?

If you didn’t catch Harriet Power’s CIEP blog, ‘ChatGPT versus a human editor’, it’s an enlightening and entertaining read that went down well with our social media followers on LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter. Harriet instructed ChatGPT to take a proofreading test, write a blog post, and edit some fiction and a set of references. In the proofreading and editing tasks, it did ‘pretty well’ and was impressive in simplifying a fiction passage while keeping its main points. It also wrote a serviceable blog draft.

The two main problems Harriet noticed in the technology were a distinct lack of sparkle in ChatGPT’s writing and editing, and its ‘tendency to “hallucinate”: it’s very good at making stuff up with complete confidence’. (This tendency was also written about by Susanne Dunlap for Jane Friedman’s website, in an article called ‘Using ChatGPT for book research? Take exceeding care’.) Weighing up her test run, Harriet concluded:

ChatGPT apparently struggles to remain coherent when responding to much longer pieces of text (like whole books). It isn’t always factually accurate: you can’t entirely trust anything it’s saying. I can’t imagine how it’d make a good development editor, or how it’d handle raising complex, sensitive author queries. It can’t track changes well. It can’t think like a human, even when it can convincingly sound like one.

However, Harriet added the caveat that in her view it may be ‘years or even months’ before ChatGPT might be able to start competing with human editors. So, how should we respond to that?

computer screen showing OpenAI logo and text

How can editorial professionals move forward with AI?

Perhaps there’s no choice but to look at the possible upsides of the AI debate. Anne McCarthy for the New York Book Forum starts us off in ‘The potential impact of AI on editing and proofreading’ by reminding us that lightbulbs and the ‘horseless carriage’ inspired dire predictions in their day. She concludes: ‘Books always have (and always will) require a human touch: it’s what draws us readers to them.’

Amanda Goldrick-Jones, in an article for the Editors Toronto blog called ‘ChatGPT and the role of editors’, offers some wise and hopeful advice: there’s a point at which we, as editorial professionals, have to trust ourselves.

If anyone is well-positioned to explore and critique the possibilities and challenges of AI-generated writing, it’s an editor … So, as with other communication technologies, editors must self-educate about its affordances, propose clear ethical boundaries, and critically engage with its limitations. It’s a tool, not our robot overlord.

Part of this consideration and engagement is understanding AI’s risks, and Michelle Garrett lays these out very effectively in a blog post from March, ‘The realities of using ChatGPT to write for you – what to consider when it comes to legalities, reputation, search and originality’.

Moving one step further, a Q&A with writer Elisa Lorello on Jane Friedman’s website talks about actively using ChatGPT to become ‘creatively fertile’. Lorello testifies that when she started using the technology in earnest, ‘It’s like I suddenly gained an edge in productivity, organization, and creativity’.

And finally, Alex Hern in The Guardian described what happened when he spent a week using ChatGPT to enhance his leisure activities. If you’re not ready to use AI at work, perhaps you could at least get a couple of recipes out of it.

With thanks to the users of the CIEP’s forums for the links they shared in recent discussions.

About the CIEP

The Chartered Institute of Editing and Proofreading (CIEP) is a non-profit body promoting excellence in English language editing. We set and demonstrate editorial standards, and we are a community, training hub and support network for editorial professionals – the people who work to make text accurate, clear and fit for purpose.
Find out more about:

 

Photo credits: robot hand by Tara Winstead on Pexels; OpenAI screen by Jonathan Kemper on Unsplash.

Posted by Sue McLoughlin, blog assistant.

The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of the CIEP.

Reviewing and updating the CIEP blog

Andrew Hodges, who is a member of the CIEP’s social media team, has been busy reviewing the CIEP blog to make sure our posts are still relevant, useful and discoverable. In this post he explains what this entails. 

When starting a blog, simply putting content out there is a good strategy: we all know that it’s easier to edit existing copy than start with a blank page. And the CIEP has come a long way since it set up the blog in 2014. The Institute has grown a lot in recent years, and many changes currently under way reflect that growth and the Institute’s chartered status.

Just like a house, some of the blog’s furnishings and fittings still look great after eight years. Others haven’t aged so well, while others have gone completely out of style and could do with more than a revamp.

A blog is a marketing tool designed to serve its members and promote the Institute. The blog therefore needs to remain relevant, and it should be interesting and discoverable to potential members and our wider audiences.

That’s why the CIEP Council asked me to step in and review the posts, as well as the book reviews, with these goals in mind.

The good stuff

There are many excellent posts that remain relevant. These include ‘evergreen posts’ on editorial topics and business skills. How to style ellipses in New Hart’s Rules and Chicago style rarely changes, and when or if it does, that would be big editorial news!

The blog now has over 350 posts, all publicly available for free, and new ones are added most weeks.

Time for change

Some of the older posts are no longer relevant for various reasons, which is why I have reviewed them for the information team and Council.

In the first stage of my work, I divided these into posts that need a content review or deletion, and posts that need optimising. Here’s the reasoning:

Content review or deletion

Out-of-date posts: We no longer need posts on topics such as recommendations for office exercise equipment in 2016 with broken links to sales websites, or a short summary of a 2017 conference presentation. With reviewed books, a new edition may have been published.

Posts with little content: Some of the older posts are short with very little content, and other blog posts have covered these topics in more detail. Very short posts provide little value, and search engines do not rank them highly.

Posts that don’t reflect our values: Some of the older posts take positions on debates that are now old hat. Others use phrases such as ‘non-native speaker’ (when the label is attributed to others) that can cause harm. Some of these posts are still highly relevant but need a content review.

Irrelevant posts: A few posts aren’t directly relevant to the CIEP and the work that its members do.

Optimisation

SEO issues with the blog titles: Some posts have cryptic titles that sound clever. (I used to work as an academic researcher, and this was commonplace in the humanities and social sciences. It can also be fine in other contexts, it just isn’t ideal for the blog genre.)

For example, imagine that you are copyediting a report written in British English. You encounter a sentence and are unsure about whether a certain comma before ‘and’ is optional. Would you search for:

‘Commas: The Chameleon Conundrum’ or

‘Do I need to put a comma before “and”’?

Fabulous references to Culture Club aside, these kinds of tweaks to titles can make our useful evergreen content more discoverable.

Other SEO issues: Other tweaks can improve discoverability too. Each blog post should have a keyword repeated throughout the text and headings (a word or phrase that people are likely to search for online), and things like metadata, a URL that includes the keyword, ALT descriptions and image URLs that reference what is in the picture etc.

You can optimise blog posts by making content changes too. For instance, by cutting up large sentences, including more transition words etc.

But we (the information team, Council and I) have decided to focus on quick SEO wins. This means we won’t be making changes to the main body of the blog posts and book reviews (except for changing SfEP to CIEP).

Wooden blocks spelling out 'SEO'

Progress so far

The first step has been to review all the blog posts and book reviews briefly and come up with an initial recommendation – delete the post, optimise it or keep it as it is.

In summary, a lot of non-evergreen posts from the first three years of the blog (2014–2017) have been recommended for deletion or archiving (if they are of relevance to the CIEP’s history).

For all the suggested deletions, I’ve written a list with a short explanation of the reason for each deletion and have passed this on to the Council. Abi Saffrey, the CIEP’s information director, has reviewed this and then made the deletions.

Next steps

Now we have a trimmed-down set of blog posts and book reviews.

The next step will be to make minor changes to some blog posts (optimising them) and reviews.

These changes will include:

  • changing old post titles to better reflect the content and optimise for SEO
  • inserting or changing subheadings that clearly reflect the content
  • deleting any remaining references to the SfEP
  • making sure the URLs reflect the content
  • flagging up any EDI issues for review
  • checking all the images have URLs that reflect the content and inserting ALT descriptions of said images
  • requesting reviews of newer editions of certain books.

We will keep a log of all changes made.

The next big change for the CIEP blog will be ensuring that all existing posts are available through the new CIEP website.

Did you write an SfEP blog post?

Most of the posts that we will change or delete were originally published when the Institute was the SfEP. If you wrote a blog post for the SfEP, you may want to check whether it is still there. If it’s not and you’re unhappy about this, get in touch and we can have a chat about possible options (perhaps you could write an updated blog post on that topic). And, of course, the same applies if you’ve written a post since we became the CIEP.

Get in touch

About Andrew Hodges

Headshot of Andrew Hodges

 

Andrew Hodges runs an editorial business called The Narrative Craft in Edinburgh, UK. He loves line-editing fiction and ethnography and enjoys chatting with science fiction and fantasy authors about worldbuilding and point of view issues whenever he can.

 

About the CIEP

The Chartered Institute of Editing and Proofreading (CIEP) is a non-profit body promoting excellence in English language editing. We set and demonstrate editorial standards, and we are a community, training hub and support network for editorial professionals – the people who work to make text accurate, clear and fit for purpose.

Find out more about:

 

Photo credits: letters by Pixabay; SEO blocks by Oleksandr Pidvalnyi, both on Pexels. 

Posted by Harriet Power, CIEP information commissioning editor.

The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of the CIEP.

Round-up: CIEP conference 2022

The CIEP’s 2022 hybrid conference, ‘Editing in a diverse world’, took place from 10 to 12 September at Kents Hill Park, Milton Keynes, and online. In this article we’ve gathered attendees’ reviews and reactions before, during and after the event, on social media and in individual blogs. Whether you made it to the conference in person or online, and even if you didn’t attend this time, we hope it gives you a sense of the news, learning, atmosphere and fun of #CIEP2022.

Before: Hashtag excitement

‘Less than two weeks until #CIEP2022! Who’s coming? Starting to feel very, very close indeed.’ On 29 August, CIEP chair Hugh Jackson (@JPS_Editing) informally kicked off conference proceedings with the first use of its Twitter hashtag. Others followed suit, posting before the event about matching fingernail varnish to business cards (@dinnydaethat), and how their knitting was looking (@AjEditorial) in preparation for a meeting of the CIEP’s Haber-dash-ers craft group.

The day before the conference, a fabulous time was wished to fellow editors (by @JillCucchi), and on Day 1 we got commentary on how journeys to Milton Keynes were going, whether that was on three trains (@GhughesEd) or a long, long car journey from Glasgow (@Jane_33South). On Day 2, one of the speakers, Professor Lynne Murphy (@lynneguist), announced she was on her way with: ‘Judging from the tweets, it looks like a very interesting conference so far!’ Conference director Beth Hamer (@BethHamer1) responded with ‘Looking forward to seeing you. We’re having a ball.’

During: ‘Viva hybrid conferences!’

There were two main strands of social media activity during the conference. One was by in-person delegates: LinkedIn commentary on proceedings and live tweeting. @ayesha_chari got a special mention by @The_CIEP social media central for her ‘exceptional live tweeting’, and she flawlessly relayed events until the very end of the conference and Ian McMillan’s plenary session, when she wrote: ‘Laughing too hard to live tweet or do anything else. (If this were in ink on paper, there’d be smudges from laughing tears.)’

The other strand was from our online delegates. As in-person delegates wiped away tears of laughter in Milton Keynes, virtual delegate @akbea tweeted: ‘Sitting in my car outside a school in Wakefield listening to the wonderful @IMcMillan delivering the final talk of #ciep2022. Viva hybrid conferences!’ This parallel in-person/online experience enriched the conference for all the delegates, as questions and comments in sessions arrived through Zoom from remote attendees, and those at home got a taste of the live action through the video link-up. Some even took part remotely in the famous CIEP conference quiz on the Saturday night.

Social media gave us some insights into where and how people were consuming the conference. One delegate wrote on LinkedIn: ‘I’m thrilled I got to attend online so I could monitor my son’s Covid symptoms in-between sessions. Phew!’ @SaraKitaoji, in Australia, posted a picture of the tea she was drinking in order to stay awake: ‘The key to late night Zoom meetings: Japanese green tea. A cute cat cup helps, too. Enjoying more 3am–5am #networking sessions at #ciep2022.’

During these three days, because delegates were joining from everywhere in the globe, from the USA to India, from Germany to Thailand, it felt like a small world. As Hugh Jackson gave his closing address, @TrivediAalap, based in Canada, posted: ‘@The_CIEP transforms the definition of home. It is my home. Wherever, whenever.’ And just afterwards, @FreshLookEdit wrote: ‘So grateful the Spatial Chat was left open after the conference officially closed so the online peeps could linger a little longer. What an amazing weekend of fun, friendship, and learning. Thank you to all the organizers, volunteers, speakers, and delegates!’

After: Catching up and rounding up

After conferences, many attendees need time to review their time away and catch up on family time, sleep or relaxation. This year’s post-conference social media was heavy on tea, candles and TV. Some delegates were battling an earworm placed by Ian McMillan with his song about conferences, ‘Here come the lanyard people’.

The talk was also of catching up on sessions missed. A couple of weeks after the conference, @HelenSaltedit reported: ‘Just watched my first #CIEP2022 video (catching up with sessions I missed during @the_ciep conference).’ The videoed sessions kept giving, as did the learning points in them. On 18 October @TheClarityEditr wrote: ‘Inspired by Hester Higton’s #CIEP2022 session, I’ve FINALLY made some templates, updated SOPs and added space in my mega-spreadsheet to more systematically calculate project quotes.’

Two delegates wrote round-up blogs soon after the conference that transported us back to the whole experience. Even though her team came fourth in the quiz (down from first last year), Sue Littleford, who attended online, concluded her blog with an uplifting image: ‘The CIEP is the rising tide that lifts all editors’ boats, and at every conference I’m reminded of how proud I am to belong to it.’ Annie Deakins described her sixth CIEP/SfEP conference as ‘great company with fellow editorial colleagues, learning in the form of continuous professional development (CPD), and laughing … so much laughing!’ Sue and Annie also gave interesting reviews of some of the sessions, so be sure to catch their blogs.

The most lasting legacy from #CIEP2022? Even all the happy memories and invaluable lessons had a rival for the prize of what would stay with delegates longest. On 3 October, @ayesha_chari wrote on Twitter: ‘Omg! It’s back in my head! @The_CIEP conference goers, HELP replace the earworm please.’ What, this earworm: ‘Here come the lanyard people …’? Oops! Sorry.


About the CIEP

The Chartered Institute of Editing and Proofreading (CIEP) is a non-profit body promoting excellence in English language editing. We set and demonstrate editorial standards, and we are a community, training hub and support network for editorial professionals – the people who work to make text accurate, clear and fit for purpose.

Find out more about:

 

A tribute to Judith Butcher

Judith ButcherIt is with great sadness that we report the passing on 6 October of our honorary president, Judith Butcher. Judith was an important influence in our professional world as a teacher, author and colleague, and she was a good friend and kind mentor to many members of the Society. We are fortunate that she has passed on her wisdom to us through her presence and her writings. Our thoughts are with her family and friends.

Judith Butcher will be remembered for her life-long service to UK publishing. She has done more than anyone else to establish and maintain the high editorial standards that have earned the UK publishing industry worldwide respect. Her work has undoubtedly improved the quality of published works in the UK and around the world, benefiting all types of readers by enhancing their enjoyment and understanding of the printed word.

Judith is best known as the author of Copy-editing: The Cambridge Handbook for Editors, Copy-editors and Proofreaders, referred to throughout the English-speaking world as ‘the copy-editor’s bible’. But her book is only the most tangible product of the dedication to editorial excellence that characterised her long career. Her achievements can be grouped under three headings.

Manager and trainer

During her 20 years as chief subeditor (= copy-editor) for Cambridge University Press, Judith developed the emerging craft of copy-editing into a fully fledged discipline and established it as an essential stage in the publishing process. The unreliable and costly tradition of trusting the printer’s readers to pick up errors after typesetting was replaced by a methodical system of preparing manuscripts for typesetting and eliminating errors in advance. Judith set up and managed what CUP’s former chief executive Dr Jeremy Mynott has called ‘the best subediting department of any academic publishing house in the English-speaking world’. By personal example and using the growing file of notes that eventually became the Cambridge Handbook, she trained scores of copy­editors, many of whom subsequently carried her principles and standards to other publishing houses in the UK and overseas.

Author

Judith turned her training notes into a house manual for CUP’s copy-editors and eventually into the book published by CUP as Copy-editing. It was the first copy-editing manual in English and has remained the undisputed authority in its field for over 40 years. When she retired from employment Judith kept the book up to date, making extensive revisions to keep abreast of changes in publishing technology and procedures. However, the fundamental principles that she set out remain unchanged. The book set the standard for good editing practice and disseminated it throughout the UK, the English-speaking world and even beyond: it has been translated into several languages. Copy-editing enabled standards to be maintained during the structural changes of the 1970s and 1980s, as publishing houses shed staff and turned increasingly to freelance copy-editors. Copy-editing is now predominantly a freelance occupation, and the book has provided indispensable guidance to generations of freelances without access to in-house training.

Mentor

It was to support the growing number of freelances that the Society of Freelance Editors and Proofreaders (now the Society for Editors and Proofreaders) was founded in 1988. Judith enthusiastically agreed to become its first honorary president, and in this voluntary capacity she gave the society’s officers invaluable support for many years. She attended almost every annual conference and local meeting of the society, participating fully in workshops and discussions. In particular, Judith continued to nurture new copy-editors and proofreaders, giving unstintingly of her advice and encouragement.

Judith’s personal modesty, tact and generosity informed her work in all these spheres. As a manager, she inspired as much affection as respect; as an author, her tone was friendly as well as erudite; and as president of the professional body, she underpinned its ethos of mutual support and cooperation.

 

From notes compiled by Naomi Laredo in 2004, with contributions from SfEP members and former colleagues of Judith (updated by Margaret Hunter 9 October 2015)