Embrace the change and be a part of it, not apart from it...
The biennial IPEd (Institute of Professional Editors) conference, WriteEditIndex, was recently held in Canberra (6-9 May) and in its wake I felt compelled to write a short piece about the event...but also about our profession.
Following the official opening during which delegates were offered a warm, wonderful and, let’s be frank, hilarious welcome to country, the conference kicked off with an equally-brilliant keynote speech from Jackie French (Diary of a Wombat) warmly embracing editors as crucial elements to her success as a writer.
And then we swung into two days of back-to-back sessions covering a wide range of topics across our profession, with a particular emphasis this year on Indexing, which is as simple as it sounds (ie creating indexes for books) and yet as complex, and requiring a level of professional rigour, as you could only imagine.
But for me one of the most important sessions was a heated discussion during the IPEd plenary session as to where IPEd was placed with the already-voted-upon proposal to radically alter the nature of the organisation and its relationship to the currently individual state-run societies.
The guts of the proposal is for IPEd to become the national membership body, with the states retaining control of local matters related to their members, such as professional development opportunities and networking functions. With this change would also come a higher annual fee (100-150% more than what members are currently paying) but also, hopefully, a more financially able and inherently stable advocate for the profession at the national level.
Change of this magnitude in any organisation, or in this case, profession, can be confronting, and it was clear from the heated discussion that occurred during the plenary that there are those in favour of the move and those who are not.
This proposal for potentially disruptive change that holds some risks, as all change does but potentially also many benefits, was overshadowed by what I perceive as a far more clear-and-present danger hanging over the profession.
We are, and have been for some time, witnessing the seismic tremors of digital disruption shaking the very foundation of our profession. This has been accompanied by a broader move within communications, media and publishing away from a day when the fine tuning of copy was deemed important to a time where more often than not getting copy live as quickly as possible rules all.
Such a change sees editors (particularly in the digital space) either sadly losing their jobs (in particular sub-editors) or finding that they must embrace a wider professional role that encompasses writing, editing, sub-editing, imaging, production, SEO-ing (my word, made up, but we’re at a time where we can do this!)…the list could go on.
In this uncertain landscape, we need a vocal campaigner for who we are and what we do at a national level. In the same way that screenwriters have the Australian Writers Guild, writers have the Australian Society of Authors and actors have Equity, such a body would have more serious clout to protect our professional standing and promote it further. This body would act as a strident advocate with the prime mission of arresting the potential slide of our profession into the shadows and pulling editors and indexers back into professional prominence.
It is imperative that our profession presents a strong, united face to meet the current challenges before us and any potential trials ahead.
A united face and strength of purpose that would best be shown by IPEd becoming our primary, national organisational body.
So, for any of my colleagues reading this, think carefully about the upcoming vote to transition to a national membership model. I urge you to consider that this comes at a critical juncture in the future of our profession and that to not make this bold move now presents a risk to us and the guts of what we do.
On a positive note, this moment presents us with the opportunity to shore up and strengthen our presence on the national stage in terms of who we are as profession and how important we are to so many other professions - publishing, media, communications, marketing, PR - the list could go on.
To show that we are moving with the times rather than fighting against them, and to remain relevant and well-regarded.
It is the chance to be a part of a new unfolding story about the great work we do and not the closing chapter of an outdated, dog-eared tome relegated to the dustbin of professional history.
Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.
John F. Kennedy
Writer, Editor, Researcher, Consultant
9 年Thank you, Paul, yours is a very enlightening commentary. As you may recall (we met briefly!), I was in Canberra too, as a member of the Society of Editors WA. I'm acutely aware of how much work and thought has gone into this historic restructure, at the IPEd level. I don't expect it be roses all the way with the process, there will be teething pains, but on balance I agree with you, there is a need for a strong unified national body in these troubled times.
Contact Officer – Participant and Provider Channels at NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission
9 年Thank you, Paul. This is a discussion we all need to have and your clarity is appreciated. For my part, I found myself a little frustrated listening to the discussion regarding membership fees. Our current state membership fees are very affordable, yes, but if we wish to grow as contenders in this brave new world, then we need to invest in ways to help make that happen. I don't feel that even $300 pa is unreasonable - it's less than a dollar a day. If one can't afford that, then is one truly in business? And if that's the basis for the decision as to whether to 'go national' or not, then I feel that's short-sighted. And I think that's the point here. We need to be far-sighted lest we get left even further behind. I’m also glad to see I’m not the only one who struggles with my ATO classification!
Editing, indexing, proofreading
9 年Yes, it was a great conference! And I agree Paul, we need to stand as a united profession. I too hope my colleagues will see the benefits of a national body that will raise our profile and promote our professionalism and expertise. Considering how long editing has been around as a job it's crazy we are still lumped together under admin services by the tax department!
Writer. Editor & proofreader (semi-retired). Redundancy slayer. Grammar warrior. Mum. Granny. Dancer. Skier. Rugby union tragic. JP. #proofreadingaustralia #fullproofreadingservices #writing #editing #proofreading #JP
9 年A good, thoughtful argument, Paul. I agree that raising the profile of our profession will benefit all of us and our value will become more credible and realistic. I am frustrated that it's hard to even categorise our profession. For example, at tax time my work is classified as 'administrative services' because there's no code for editors and because I have clients who are writers, academics, businesses and NGOs, I don't fit into any one industry. In that regard, I suggest we also build relationships with small business organisations and chambers of commerce at state and national level, and I think IPEd would do well to lobby government such as the Australian Taxation Office to ensure we are properly recognised and treated with more consideration.
Communications & education professional
9 年Great to read your views Paul. As I have said in other places, the most important immediate priority for our members at the moment will be to bring themselves up to date with the current thinking so they can make an informed decision when it comes to voting. I am confident that once editors gain a good understanding of what they have to gain from a new national organisation, they will be compelled by the arguments to move in this new direction.