Common myths about professional editing – debunked

What professional editing entails is often misunderstood. Many writers approach an editor with a mixture of curiosity and anxiety, shaped by assumptions about what editing involves and what it might do to their work.

This post addresses some of the most common myths and concerns about professional editing – and explains what actually happens in practice.

Myth 1: Editing will change the meaning

Reality: A professional editor’s primary responsibility is to preserve meaning, not alter it.

Good editing aims to make the author’s meaning clearer, more precise and less open to misinterpretation. In specialist fields such as medicine and healthcare, maintaining meaning is critical. Editors work carefully with terminology, context and nuance, and will query anything that appears ambiguous or potentially inaccurate rather than making assumptions.

If a change risks altering meaning, it should be discussed with the author – not imposed.

Myth 2: An editor will rewrite my text

Reality: Editors are not there to replace your voice with their own.

Most professional editing focuses on clarity, consistency and correctness, not wholesale rewriting.

Where rewording is suggested, it is usually to:

• remove ambiguity

• improve readability

• resolve repetition or inconsistency

A good editor adapts to the author’s tone and purpose, rather than imposing a generic 'editorial voice'.

Myth 3: My English is good, so I don’t need an editor

Reality: Editing is not about correcting poor English.

Many of the documents that benefit most from editing are written by highly competent, experienced professionals.

Editors add value by:

• seeing the text as a first-time reader

• identifying gaps, assumptions or unclear references

• ensuring consistency across long or complex documents

Familiarity with a subject can make it harder, not easier, to spot where clarity is missing.

Myth 4: Proofreading and editing are the same thing

Reality: They are different stages, serving different purposes.

Proofreading is a final check for surface errors once the text is otherwise complete. Editing works at a deeper level – improving clarity, flow and consistency.

If a document still needs clearer wording or structural attention, proofreading alone will not address those issues.

Myth 5: Editors add their own ideas to my content

Reality: Editors improve presentation and clarity – they do not generate or validate content.

While editors may flag inconsistencies, ambiguities or apparent gaps, they do not:

• invent new material

• resolve factual disputes without input

• take responsibility for subject-matter decisions

In technical and medical contexts, content ownership always remains with the author.

Myth 6: Using an editor means I’m not a good writer

Reality: Using an editor is a professional decision, not a remedial one.

Editing is a standard part of professional publishing, academic work and organisational communication.

Many experienced writers work with editors routinely, recognising that:

• fresh eyes improve quality

• clarity benefits readers

• external review reduces risk

Engaging an editor reflects a commitment to accuracy and professionalism.

Myth 7: Editors just correct grammar

Reality: Grammar is only one small part of what editors do.

Depending on the brief, editing may involve:

• improving sentence structure and flow

• ensuring consistency in terminology

• aligning text with a style guide or submission requirements

• querying ambiguous or potentially misleading statements

The goal is not perfection for its own sake, but effective communication.

Why these myths persist

Many of these assumptions stem from the way editorial roles are labelled. Terms such as copyeditor, proofreader and editor are frequently used interchangeably (see A note on terminology below), even though they can mean different things in different contexts.

When scope, purpose and expectations are discussed clearly from the outset, editing is more easily understood as a supportive, transparent collaboration – not an intrusive or vague process.

Final thoughts

Professional editing is about supporting authors, not overriding them. At its best, it strengthens a document while respecting its purpose, audience and voice.

If you have concerns about how editing might affect your work, a professional editor should be willing to explain their approach clearly – and to work with you to ensure the level of input is appropriate.

---

A note on terminology: The terms medical copyeditor, medical proofreader and medical editor are often confused and used interchangeably. To add to the confusion, there are yet other terms used for different niches such as plain-English editor, medico-legal copyeditor and editorial assistant (the latter is commonly used in medical communications). I personally use medical editor to describe my role, and medical editing to describe both medical copyediting and medical proofreading, as this suggests a hybrid approach as per my own clients' preferences ... plus, it's simpler! See here for more detail on the traditional differences between proofreading and copyediting.