Create your very own Auto Publish News/Blog Site and Earn Passive Income in Just 4 Easy Steps
Have you ever had to edit bad content?
You know the kind. It doesn't contain enough points to make a connection. You can't save it by asking the author a question or two.
It is so bad.
But what if you can't send a simple rejection email and throw it in the digital trash? Maybe you have nothing to replace in the editorial calendar. Maybe it features a hard-to-get interview subject. Or perhaps you need the author's name because they are a subject matter expert or executive who expects their content to appear on your channels.
What can an editor do?
These two ways will help you turn bad content into publishable content, with or without the original author's help.
Coach the author in creating a new draft
If you can work directly with the author, do it. Yes, it can be uncomfortable. After all, the author didn't think the content was terrible. But a coaching session will do more for you and the author. If they're part of your internal content team (or work as a freelancer for your brand), coaching should result in less (or no) bad content in the future.
Tell them that you appreciate the work that went into the content, but that it hasn't hit the mark yet. Invite them to work on the revision with you so that they don't waste time revising. If they refuse, continue with the reverse engineering process described in the next section and communicate the refusal to your manager. If you're the manager, don't let them refuse coaching – you can't take the time to reverse engineer everything they create.
Plan at least an hour for the coaching session. It's better to schedule a meeting than to do it right away. A coaching appointment communicates its importance, allows for uninterrupted time, and gives the author time to review the content before the conversation begins.
Here is a helpful workflow for the coaching session.
1. Check how well the author understood the task. You might say, “Let's make sure we agree on the purpose of the content.” Then ask them to answer these questions in one or two sentences:
- What is this content about?
- Who is the target group?
- What should this audience learn or do after consuming this content?
If their answers match yours, move on to the next stage.
If the answers are different, you've identified the biggest problem with the content. Talk about the right answers to these questions so you can begin the next step on common ground.
2. Examine the why behind the design. Ask the author to explain in more detail why he approached the story the way he did. Look at the heading, subheading, and supporting paragraph and ask why the author included them and how they help the reader get to the next point, section, etc. Encourage the author to take notes during this analysis.
Yes, this process takes time, but it serves multiple purposes. The author must provide a reason for creating it or disclose that they had no reason. You can also share how you, as a reader, interpreted the content. Most importantly, this encourages a conversation about how well the specific content meets the purpose of the article and the point or topic being addressed.
3. Request a new outline. With this input, the author is well prepared to create an outline for the latest draft. At the beginning of the outline, they should enter the answers to the basic questions discussed previously – why it is being written, who the audience is, and what the audience should do after consuming the content. After they complete a new outline, go through it with them until it is logical, contains enough supporting detail, and is balanced.
Now they are ready to write new – good – content. (Or at least the content connects the dots enough that you can convert it into good content.)
Reverse engineer the broken content
Sometimes you can't work directly with the author because they're not on your team. In other cases, you can no longer demand their time or expect them to be open to improving their content (think SMEs and executives).
Instead, you will reverse engineer the content. Here's how:
1. Create a new document or file. Do not attempt to convert the incorrect content into an outline in the original file. Open a new document. You go back and forth between these documents, picking up points from the bad content and incorporating them into a new outline. I do not recommend deleting content from the original and pasting it into the new document. You could accidentally delete something that you didn't include but might need later.
2. Write a placeholder headline. In the new document, create a headline that addresses the why and who of the content (e.g., “How to create better content for your marketing program”). Don't waste time optimizing this headline. It simply serves to reinforce the purpose of the outline.
3. Highlight (and color code) important points in the original document. Reread the incorrect content and highlight sentences or sections that you need for the new document. Color-code the selection to make it easier to organize the information in the new outline. Assign each content role a color: blue for subtopics, green for points that support a subtopic, and yellow for information that supports those points.
4. Copy the subtopics (highlighted in blue) into your new outline. These subtopics become Roman numerals in your outline. Tip: Don't let the author's H2s and H3s guide your work by default. Its (flawed) structure may have contributed to the poor content.
5. Identify the points in the original document that support the subtopics (highlighted in green).. Add them as bullet points under the section headings in the new outline.
6. Look for additional information in the original document that describes these supporting points in more detail (highlighted in yellow).. Add it to the outline.
7. Review anything that wasn't highlighted in the original document. Decide whether it is worth including this information in the new version. If so, add it to the new outline and highlight it with the appropriate color in the original document. If not, mark it in red to indicate that you have read and discarded it.
8. Rearrange and edit the sections and vertices. Create a logical flow that guides the reader through your argument.
9. Ask: Would this outline result in good content? If your answer is yes, move on to the paraphrasing phase, whether it is yourself or another writer. If your answer is no, then you need to do more analysis (and that's probably because really bad content can't make for a good outline).
10. Check the outline for gaps. What information is needed to build the bridge if the second section deviates too far from the first section? Does each section have the correct support points? What additional information is needed?
11. Indicate where things are missing. Use italics or highlight in a color you haven't used before to easily see where you need to fill in the gaps.
12. Evaluate the balance of the outline. Does each section use a relatively equal amount of real estate? Or, for example, does the third section take up 80% of the structure? If one section dominates the outline, that may be a better angle to focus on and forget about the rest. Or if a section is sparse, it may be unnecessary.
Your answers to these questions will help you revise the outline—and add the missing information—until it becomes a solid foundation. From there, you can write and edit to turn it into good content.
When you're ready to publish, let the original author know so they aren't surprised to see the rewrite under their byline. Send the final version with a note: “Thank you for your work on this piece. We put it through our standard editing process. If you have any questions, please let us know.”
Normally, this straightforward approach only elicits gratitude. If you have additional questions, explain in a sentence or two why you chose to emphasize (or tone down) elements of the original. You don't have to send a whole bunch of reasons for the edit changes.
Another tip to save bad content
As part of your content development process, require all writers to record their interviews and provide transcripts (or copies of their email or direct message interviews). Then, when they submit bad content, you can check whether the interview went poorly or whether there are hidden gems that could be worked into the outline and ultimately the (new) good content.
So the next time content arrives in your editing queue that can't be fixed through great editing alone, take a deep breath and start that recovery process.
Special thanks to Katherine Heigel for the question that led to this article.
Do you like what you read here? Get a subscription for daily or weekly updates. It's free – and you can change your preferences or unsubscribe at any time.
HANDPICKED RELATED CONTENT:
Cover image by Joseph Kalinowski/Content Marketing Institute
Create your very own Auto Publish News/Blog Site and Earn Passive Income in Just 4 Easy Steps
