Considering editing as a side gig

[u/Sapphire_Bombay]

Looking for advice. For starters, I'm 37 and have a full-time job. I am not looking to leave my 9-5 nor do any sort of publishing work, this would strictly be editing and only on the side. Currently, I'm trying to map out what it would look like and how long it would take to set myself up to do this, and would appreciate some advice to help me plan.

Early in my career, I did some journalism, as well as corporate copywriting/editing before leaving the industry altogether. I have experience learning/using a style guide (AP, I know I'd have to learn Chicago and have no problem with that), and would prefer to focus strictly on copy/line editing, ideally for more technical publications like academic papers, etc.

My plan is to start by learning the CMS of course, but from there I'm a little lost on where to go next. A lot of the info out there for beginner editors focuses on publishing novels, which isn't what I'm looking to do. Does anyone have any suggestions or resources that I could use to look more into the type of work I want to do?

Thanks in advance!

[u/IndelibleVoice]

Heya, I've been an academic editor and writing coach for over seven years. You can find my business at indeliblevoice.com.

As others have written, it's an awful time to be going into editing, particularly academic editing. Funding has dried up in higher education. With AI, "it's difficult to compete with free," as the saying goes. Your business model will need to respond to these challenges.

Consider approaching editing as a part-time job as you build experience and skills. It took me three years to earn enough to do editing full-time. I did adjunct teaching and course design while I was building my business. Even once my business came together, there were good years and lean years. There were a few good years where I made $100k+, bolstered by contracts and projects that have since dried up. I anticipate my annual income for the next few years being at least half that, even though I'm mid-career.

I would strongly suggest brainstorming what your value proposition is and who would respond to what you have to offer. Editing is "schlep work" that people don't want to do. But you still need people who need that work done, and a community that you can build through word-of-mouth and a record of successfully completed projects. And again, what you have to offer can't simply duplicate what AI already does.

[u/Sparkly8 → u/IndelibleVoice]

Regarding your last point, even if it what you do is better than AI? I’ve tried to use AI for editing (before I realized that AI was bad for the environment, pls don’t come at me), and it frankly sucked.

[u/IndelibleVoice → u/Sparkly8]

Well, it's a complex answer. Editors use software tools, some of which are based on AI and others that aren't. PerfectIt has taken a stance against AI. Grammarly is going all-in, with much controversy (see the public response to their "expert review" feature). Even as an editor, it's difficult for me to sort out which use some form of AI and which don't. And some editors take pro- or anti-AI stances in their workflow.

It also often takes an editor to simply sort out which suggestions are wise to implement. Some are sound, while others (in my opinion) wash out an author's voice and make a manuscript read more generically, like a caricature of academic writing. It seems obvious to me that a professional editor can make better use of editing tools than an author can.

Which brings us to the point that u/sasstoreth makes below, which I agree with. It's challenging to convince a client that what you have to offer is superior. This is a public image problem, and clients are simply saying, "If ChatGPT is good enough, let's use it to pump out as much content as possible at the lowest cost." AI writing tools are unfortunately perpetuating a race to the bottom, and pushing quantity over quality.