Clipart Deck of Horrors

Image from gograph.com

I can remember the first time I ever used PowerPoint. The variety of colors, word art, clipart, etc. was overwhelming and I used as much as possible. It was so different from Word and Paint [my primary tools up to that point, probably around '97]. I made the same mistakes everyone does in their first presentation: colored font, distracting backgrounds, having every bit of text present so that I was just reading off the slides instead of having cue cards with additional info for the basic/important items on the slides. I loved exploring clipart and finding just the right image for the slide. My mom still has some of my initial PowerPoint-created newsletters and posters covered in stars and generic images of animals and people.

Eventually Google came around and I started to get my images from there - hurriedly trying to find ones without watermarks. I had no idea about copyright rules until probably high school English when suddenly I was bombarded with the differences between foot notes and end notes, works cited and bibliographies, citing quotes and paraphrasing.

As a university student plagued with a news report almost every week about some student failing a class or getting expelled over plagiarism I became very cautious and mildly afraid my professor would run my paper through one of those "plagiarism detector" programs that were suddenly popping up and finding out that I used the same phrase someone else did and I either didn't cite it properly or never even knew it existed [horrible fear of this accidental plagiarism based on a Gilmore Girls episode where Rory got in copyright trouble for using clichés].

As an editor at a tech research firm the copyright rules are very simple: provide links and names for all quotes and statistics right on the slide, include a references slide if necessary [hardly ever done to any kind of standards, i.e. APA, MLA, *sigh*], and either use paid images from our subscription site or source the image [the real site, not Google].

For the first 8+ months I had no real issues with images other than people not giving me the image # so I could buy it from the site [only 5 people are allowed to buy images to minimize costs and confusion]. Then I got a PowerPoint deck that seemed fine until slide 80-something [out of 144]. It was filled with these horrible, generic, pastel, thickly lined clipart images. Admittedly it does say you can use clipart in our standards guide if you have to, but why would you when the paid images look so much better and are more consistent? I spent the better part of an afternoon replacing these images with similar purchased ones. Cartoon-y image of clipboard with stop watch? Replaced with paid image of clipboard with stop watch that looked more 3D and just fit better into the color scheme of the page [brown/white instead of yellow/blue/silver/black]. Funny clipart image of firefighter replaced with photograph of a firefighter.

I told the author what I had done and asked about the images I didn't feel comfortable changing - the "mystery image slide" [I had no idea what meaning he was trying to convey by using them].  He responded by saying that the images were clipart because the paid site is too general and he couldn't find what he wanted there and the clipart worked better.

I sat there in shock for about 5 minutes and then spent another 30 minutes trying to come up with an appropriate/professional response [something other than "What the hell?"]. How could he not find what he was looking for on that site, with a Google-like search engine and millions of images? He had also asked to know which changes I made. I sent him my list of 20+ image replacements, plus another 5 or so images that I sourced because they were grabbed [aka stolen] by him via Google from people's websites and blog posts. I also asked again for the meaning of the "mystery image slide."

He responded to my 20+ lines of corrections with: "Those are fine" and told me that "mystery image slide" was supposed to be facilitated by the presenter. No acknowledgement about the sheer volume of work I did or the fact that the replacement images had the same elements/meaning but actually looked professional; nothing.

I said thanks and mentioned that the "mystery image slide" [still filled with ugly clipart by the way] had no facilitator's notes and asked how could it be explained by anyone. He finally gave me a brief blurb [which I added as facilitator's notes] repeating that it was a facilitated slide. How helpful. Maybe the facilitator's notes were just invisible and I, as a lowly editor, couldn't see them even though I went through the deck at least twice.

My complaint isn't about the poor communication between myself and the author [although that is an area for personal improvement]; it is about the idea that clipart was more useful than paid images. I get that someone did design these images and technically they are paid for through our Microsoft license, but to look at them from a professional point of view, knowing that people who paid to access this document were going to look at these generic, blocky, pastel images just makes me cringe.

I'm sure there's a time and a place for clipart: when you're in school creating your first presentations, when posting something quickly on a website, when you don't have a paid subscription to an image site, etc. but I really try to avoid clipart. I am willing to use my own photographs, usually modified in Photoshop, Google images [with proper sourcing], or anything really to make my work stand out and look somewhat more professional than a middle school project.

***Final note: I did a walk through with an editing colleague showing her the original and then my changes [to make sure I wasn't crazy] and she asked for a copy to give to her husband who is the head of the design department to help build his business case to get designers involved in the research presentations. She cringed too when I showed her the "mystery image slide" and a nearby designer said "Clipart?" in a disgusted tone.

****Last note, I swear: There have been instances of people in the research department using Paint or a similar program to create an image from scratch, but it has a low success rate - only 1 was kept [that I know of] and only then because the author had a really good explanatory slide included in the appendix and the image was used in multiple presentations.

Halifac EAC 2013: Between the Lines Part 2

In June 2013 I got the opportunity to go to a work-sponsored conference and jumped at it.

The conference was the annual Editor's Association of Canada (EAC) Conference. I had attended a EAC seminar a couple months prior and enjoyed myself, and the senior editors at my company seemed excited about someone going to the conference as they were unable to go.

The schedule seemed interesting, with a variety of sessions that ranged from pure fun to pure business. I chose a couple of the first and a couple that approached the second.

---
Opening Keynote Speaker

I'm going to admit that I had no idea who Robert MacNeil was when I heard he was going to be the keynote speaker. I don't read a lot of non-fiction and I'm really bad with remembering names.

Mr. MacNeil was an excellent speaker and listening to an author of many genres talk about his experience with editors was enlightening. I was sad to see him leave the stage.

Day 1

The first session that caught my eye was "Effective manuscript queries." I have a hard time getting across in email what I really mean when I'm talking to authors. Either they don't answer all of my questions or they miss the question I was really asking due to my own wordy-ness which hides the real question or their own busy schedules. Elizabeth d'Anjou had several great tips for communicating with authors which basically boils down to "helpful, clear, brief, and tactful." This was probably the most useful-to-my-job session I went to over the whole weekend.

The next session was "Spin me a yarn, tell me a tale." The two storytellers, Liz Newkirk and Steve Vernon, were amazing performers and I was captivated by their stories and their description of what storytelling really is.

My last session on day one was "Truth in non-fiction?" David Swick was a great speaker and the audience was really engaged. He presented several sides to scandals in publishing/journalism and where he sees non-fiction heading. 

Note: I heard Copyright Changes in Canada was an excellent session from everyone who went and although I have the presenter's email address to request her PowerPoint slides I know it won't be the same.

---

Day 2

The first session I went to on the second day was "Shortening text." One of the biggest issues editors have is word count or preserving white space. To hear how Elizabeth Macfie tackles cutting text was really helpful. She gave a great list of "waffle words" to look out for and explained how to make proper cuts. This was an excellent companion session to "Manuscript queries."

"Editing magazines in a digital world" was not what I was expecting. They tried to cram too much into one hour and it got muddled. I don't feel it was worth my time and I kind of wish I had gone to "Clear communication" instead.

"Editing by number" was a standing room only session. Rosemary Tanner presented numbers in a new light. Her examples of numbers and how to edit them opened my eyes to how editors deal with all number issues and not just accuracy.

The last panel I went to was "Editing social media." The presentations were short but the discussion was engaging. It was an interesting mix of people firmly entrenched in the social media realm and those just taking their first steps. The biggest result of the whole conference was the realization that I need to participate more in the social media world and move beyond just Facebook and the occasional tweet.

The closing keynote speaker was Donna Morrissey, who's book we received in our goody bags. She didn't talk much about editing except for an anecdote at the end, but her stories about growing up and becoming an author were engaging.

---

All in all I enjoyed my first work-related conference and I look forward to Toronto EAC 2014.

Halifax EAC 2013: Between the Lines Part 1

Editors, from what I've heard, tend to be introverts who like to work independently. I am the personification of this: I have a fear of embarrassing myself in public and hence try to blend into the background at public events. This was not possible at the first work-related conference I went to.

---
I started as a junior editor at a business tech research firm in September 2012. This was a major change for me coming from a retail background where I was on my feet eight hours a day surrounded by fellow employees who were usually very chatty. I loved putting on my headphones and logging into my computer and essentially working by myself...for about two weeks. Then I became somewhat bored/lonely and frustrated. The only people close to my age were the co-ops who are only around for four months and who seemed to be very outgoing and somewhat intimidating to my introverted self. I've since become a bit more social with the people in cubicles around me, but considering I still commute an hour each way everyday I'm not one for hanging out after work and I usually get lost when they tell me the places/bars they went to on the weekend.
---
June 2013 I got the opportunity to go to a work-sponsored conference and jumped at it. They paid for my admission, my hotel room, and my flight.

The conference was the annual Editor's Association of Canada (EAC) Conference. I had attended a EAC seminar a couple months prior and enjoyed myself, and the senior editors at my company seemed excited about someone going to the conference as they were unable to go.

The schedule seemed interesting, with a variety of sessions that ranged from pure fun to pure business. I chose a couple of the first and a couple that approached the second.

What I didn't realize is that the biggest benefit to going to the conference, and indeed being a member of the EAC, is the networking opportunity. I had stumbled onto a in-house editing job almost right out of school and had never really planned to be an editor, hence I never had to network to pick up freelance jobs/internships like many start out doing. I hate small talk and shy away from meeting new people and suddenly I was trapped at an event where I was expected to do both, in addition to participating in the sessions and talking about my job [which I tend to have a hard time doing: "in-house editor/producer at a tech firm" never seems to be enough for people. I bet "editor at [insert publishing house]" is much more self-explanatory and less prone to questioning].

Suffice it to say I was surrounded by mostly women who wanted to know 1) where I'm from, 2) what do I do, and 3) do I have any connections to possible freelance jobs. My answers 1) London/KW/Toronto depending on my level of frustration regarding commuting, 2) editor at a tech research firm [always leading to more questions about what I edit and why], and 3) No. Of course from there the conversations either went towards politics/current events [which I tend not to follow closely enough to remember or don't have an opinion on], the conference itself [the "how's the weather" type of question when scrambling for conversations at a conference], or way too personal conversations about menstrual cramps, pregnancy/child-rearing [I don't have kids], or the inability of some men to find a clitoris/g-spot [I was shocked too when this came up]. I don't even talk about those last things with my best friend of 13+ years.

I survived the reception somehow and even the next day during breaks with my usual "smile and nod" technique and trying to ask as many questions as possible to redirect the attention off of me and pretending to pay attention. The last day I gave up. I sat by myself for most of the day and kept my head down except when someone from the previous day came to say "Hello." I even shared a cab ride with two other women to the airport without too much awkwardness [thanks to a chatty driver]. I was ignored at the airport except for the typical "Did you hear/understand that announcement?" and I drove home a midnight to a wonderfully silent house.
---
I've come to the conclusion that I need to get out and be more social so I've created a personal goal to be more involved in the fall [most groups have shut down for the summer]. I plan to join the K-W twig [the local EAC group] and participate as much as possible there and at work. I also plan to actually move to London to stop commuting which will give me more time to potentially be social as well as erase the "location confusion" when I say I work in London, live in K-W, fly out of Toronto.

I'll always be an introvert, but maybe I can become a chatty introvert...at least at conferences.