Be careful what you ask for

I frequently have clients who, in asking me to exmaine something they've written say, "All it needs is proofread." I try not to cringe and then gently explain that what they're requesting may not be what they really want, or shouldn't be. Here's why.

To most professional writers and editors "proofreading" refers to a process of scanning a document for errors in spelling, grammar, usage and punctuation. That's it. Proofreading amounts to little more than what Microsoft Word's spell-grammar check function accomplishes, and we all know how effective that is.

Proofreading fails to encompass a vital, more time-consuming examination that every piece of written communication should undergo – editing. When professionals edit text, they not only proofread it, but they also examine it for problems of structure, logic, style, tone and other fundamental elements. Getting these things right is what marks the difference between an effective communication and one that baffles readers. In fact, you could have a piece that's free of errors in spelling, usage and grammar and still be utterly unreadable because of the other flaws I just mentioned.

If I had to have an error in my copy, I'd rather it be a typo or punctuation goof than an error in logic or structure. And what I'm saying doesn't just go apply to someone who's barely capable of stringing two words together. Even pros need edited, not just proofread. I believe so firmly in that advice, that if a client insists that he or she wants me to comb text only for mistakes in grammar, usage and punctuation, I refuse the assignment.