#10852
Talented people with the editorial skills of condensing and organizing copy can often position themselves for jobs that don’t bear the title 'Editor.'
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2001). Careers>Editing
#24926
Collecting Books about Editing 
Intercom's 'friendly editor' discusses his extensive collection of dictionaries, grammars, and other books of interest.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2005). Articles>Editing>Style Guides>Grammar
#15103
Describes a college course on content editing--editing that focuses on clarifying content. Emphasizing career opportunity, the course touches on new technologies that have transformed editing, the editor-author relationship, and the editing of user manuals.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2000). Articles>Education>Editing
#15123
Demonstrates how well-written lists can bring order and coherence to any piece of writing.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2001). Articles>Editing
#13149
Editing is magic. A good editor can take a sentence like “References should be included in the paper sufficient to enable the reader to acquire additional information should she desire it,” and condense it to “Please include references.” Editing saves time, cost, and confusion. It’s magic.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2001). Articles>Editing
#19703
Editing to Help Students' Backs
Perhaps the worst way to condense a book is by using smaller or condensed type; you want to be especially careful that all fonts are legible. Neither should you save space by tossing out pictures or diagrams that clarify subjects. Some engineers cram paragraphs together, but paragraphs are valuable structural devices that can make subjects more clear. So the clue to successful condensation of text is not mechanical miniaturization but literary efficiency.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2003). Articles>Education>Writing>Minimalism
#24425
Three papers on editing presented at the 1967 STC Conference are revisited to emphasize the belief that editing in 1996, despite changes introduced by modern technology, is still much the same as it was 30 years ago. Editors still make changes (in language, structure, and mechanics). Editors still can work more effectively when they have a basic knowledge of production processes (composition, illustration, photography, printing). Editors still need 'uncommon skills' in managing work people, and time.
Cox, Alberta L., Donald W. Bush, Elizabeth Babcock, David Dobson and Lola Zook. STC Proceedings (1996). Articles>Editing
#24197
I labeled wordiness the most obvious fault in technical writing. In retrospect, I think I was wrong. I believe the greatest fault our writing can have is vacuity, or lack of substance. We too often write words that say nothing.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2004). Articles>Editing>Technical Editing>Technical Writing
#14425
The Heritage of American Heritage
The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition, 2000, is a massive, 2074-page volume with fascinating articles on the roots of the language and current usage. The First Edition appeared in 1969, only eight years after the Merriam-Webster Third New International Dictionary aroused a storm of protest that resounds to this day. Philip Gove, Webster’s editor, had reduced the number of entries from 600,000 to 450,000, but included 100,000 new definitions, many attached to words like beatnik. He had also used sources like Art Linkletter and TWA timetables, maintaining that not all language is formal. He had decreased use of the 'slang' label and banished 'colloquial' entirely, relying instead on quotations that gave a feel for words in context. Gove was denounced as 'permissive.' He had even included ain’t in the dictionary (with a note 'disapproved by many'). A New Yorker cartoon depicted a Merriam-Webster receptionist responding, 'Dr. Gove ain’t in.'
Bush, Donald W. Lore (2002). Articles>Language>History
#14779
The Heritage of the American Heritage Dictionary
Bush explains the history of the American Heritage Dictionary and discusses how the dictionary has evolved from its first edition, published in 1969, to its fourth, published in 2000.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2002). Articles>Language>History
#19673
Editing involves more than just formatting and inserting page numbers. You need to ask, 'How can I improve the communication?'
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2003). Articles>Editing>Writing>Technical Writing
#15141
Suggests ways to get a good job by cutting production time and cost on user manuals while increasing access and usability.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2000). Careers>Documentation>TC
#21305
We technician editors need not worry about declining employment if we can show companies the value of the technology of English. If we can demonstrate how editors can make turgid technical authors communicate better with words, sentences, paragraphs, and overall organization, we will be in demand for jobs that are more prestigious and careers that are infinitely more interesting -- because the need is so great.
Bush, Donald W. STC Proceedings (1995). Articles>Editing>Technical Editing
#19636
The Most Obvious Fault in Technical Writing
The most obvious fault is wordiness. Fortunately, long-windedness is something that editors are particularly well equipped to fix. Take a look at our manuals. They are huge, and their very bulk can make them inaccessible, especially when they are not equipped with a good index or adequate indicia in the corners of each page.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2003). Articles>Writing>Style Guides
#14650
Bush offers suggestions for editing professional journals, rather than technical manuals and proposals.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2000). Articles>Editing
#14766
The Professional Editors Network
Bush reports on a meeting of the San Diego Professional Editors Network, at which several experienced editors discussed their relationships with authors, offered tips for finding jobs, and emphasized the importance of content editing.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2002). Articles>Editing
#24324
Five experienced technical communicators will look back on changes in the field of publishing, sharing knowledge of the old ways, comparing them with what’s current, and examining how we all can benefit from both the old and the new.
Cox, Alberta L., Donald W. Bush, Elizabeth Babcock, David Dobson and Lola Zook. STC Proceedings (1998). Articles>Publishing>History
#28089
Serifs, the Feet that Guide Our Eyes
Bush's column sheds light on the history of serifs, the beginnings of sans serif fonts, and tests for legibility that aid in determining the effectiveness of serif versus sans serif type.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2006). Design>Typography
#24611
Seven Discrete Principles for Content Editing
One of many lessons I learned in 30 years of Technical Editing was to separate myself from the crowd by learning to edit technical content, using seven reader-oriented techniques.
Bush, Donald W. STC Proceedings (1996). Articles>Editing>Technical Editing
#14635
Bush suggests how technical writers can improve the accessibility of their manuals by reducing wordiness, varying syntax, and improving indexes.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2000). Design>User Centered Design
#14660
Bush questions the wisdom of rigid grammatical rules that do not take into consideration the complexities of English.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2000). Articles>Language>Style Guides
#24299
The Tantalizing Technology of English
The English language is tantalizing and altogether fascinating.
#14729
Bush clarifies the role of technical editors in light of the particular purposes of technical documents.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2001). Articles>Editing>TC
#14794
Bush describes the differing challenges of editing proposals, manuals, and professional papers.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2002). Articles>Editing
#15221
Using a Bookstore to Land a Job
Discusses how technical writers can prepare for new jobs by focusing on potential employers' needs and upgrading their writing skills.
Bush, Donald W. Intercom (2002). Careers>Interviewing>Writing
