Cut the Fluff is a weekly newsletter that will help you become a more confident writer & editor. If this was sent to you, subscribe here so you don't miss the next lesson.

Hey Reader,

My friend Kieran Drew interviewed me last week in a private call for his course students.

I've been editing his longer (~1500 words) newsletters for 4 months now. He's a fantastic writer, but he wanted to learn how to edit so he could get better at catching "blind spots." Here's how he describes it:

"You don't realize when people don't get what you're saying. We're all way too close to the knowledge that we have in our heads. And so I think a big mistake that we make when we write is we assume that people understand what we mean. And if they don't understand what we mean, they won't care about the arguments we're making. Editing helps you see those blind spots."

These pesky blind spots are extremely difficult to find because, as Kieran said, you're too close to the knowledge. You can't see when someone may need more context, more explanation, more examples.

The most frustrating part is that if you get this wrong, you're leaving friction points all over your narrative. Instead of a smooth drive, the reader hits speed bump after speed bump, which pisses them off and forces them to find another route (aka, abandon your content).

So, how can you spot these blind spots yourself?

I answered this on the call with Kieran, but that recording is private, so I'm gonna try to recreate it here with more detail.

If you wanna picture me speaking this, here's a screenshot from the call where I'm in the teaching zone:

Developmental editing is an act of asking yourself a series of questions:

• What do I actually mean by this?
• Why should the reader care about this?
• Have I explained why this actually matters?
• Did I drive this point home too little? Too much? Just right?
• What will happen if the reader doesn't do what I'm suggesting?

The hardest part about editing is that the answers to those questions are largely subjective.

I was listening to Ezra Klein's podcast episode "The Conversation Made me a Sharper Editor" the other day, and he put it so well:

"I think we have an overly narrow description of what editing is. We think of it as marking up the grammar of a sentence with a pen, but great editors — and I’ve worked with a lot of great editors — they’re mystics of a sort. They’re not technicians. They see something that isn’t there yet."

He's alluding to the fact that there are two core types of editing: copy editing (technical) and developmental editing (structural).

When most people think of editing, they think of copy editing. These are line edits you make to sentence structure. Things like changing passive to active voice, cutting unnecessary adverbs, and removing wordiness.

Kieran didn't hire me to help him copy edit. He's a pro and can handle that himself. Those pesky blind spots fall into the developmental editing category, which requires a certain instinct that's much harder to learn and teach.

Ezra Klein's guest, Adam Moss, says it requires "a heightened level of sensitivity to reaction." You need to be able to instinctually spot when something is off, then trust yourself to know what to do about it.

This is why I say the answers to the above questions are largely subjective — they rely on instinct and an ability to trust your decision-making.

That comes with time. There's no shortcut to instinct, you simply have to do a thing over and over again until you can literally feel the difference.

That said...

If someone was learning to dribble a basketball, I wouldn't tell them, "Oh just dribble until it feels right."

I'd guide them through the motions -- spread your legs shoulder length wide, bend at the knees, drop your hips, use your fingertips not your palm, keep your hand on top of the ball, etc.

The "instinct" comes from doing that every day, moving around with the ball, and creating that muscle memory.

It's the same with editing -- write without attempting to edit, take time away from your work, come back and read it, start by making developmental edits, then and only then shift into copy edits, etc.

The "instinct" comes from intentionally editing every piece of your writing.

I can't share specific edits I've made to Kieran's content, but I can refer to my free Editing Library for examples to help you see some of this in action.

Here's an example of changes you could make after asking yourself: "What do I actually mean by this?"

Original sentence:

"They’ll fight over it when your dead” isn’t just a statement of durability, but ongoing desire, conveying the image of its products being so hard-wearing that they still look good and perform well even decades after purchase."

Erica's thoughts:

What does "so-hard wearing" actually mean? What do you mean by "perform well even decades after purchase"?

If you're self-editing, this is one of those moments when you need to ask yourself if the reader will get what you mean, or if you've created a blind spot.

If you aren't sure, try writing it another way, then read both side by side to see if one feels more obvious than the other.

9 times out of 10, you want to pick the statement that reads more obvious. That doesn't mean you're dumbing your writing down, it simply means you're increasing the readability (or the ability for more people to "get" it). Clear, not clever.

(I say 9 times out of 10 because "voice of customer" trumps all. So if you have a phrase that's written in voice of customer, aka your customers would completely get it because that's how they naturally describe a problem, keep it. Still, most voice of customer phrases are clear and easy to understand, in my experience.)

Suggested edit:

"They’ll fight over it when you’re dead” doubles as a statement of durability and perennial desire. Not only will you wear their products throughout your lifetime, but they’ll last (and be fought over) for generations to come."

You can feel the difference, right? It's night and day.

Side by side:

"the image of its products being so hard-wearing" vs. "you'll wear their products throughout your lifetime"

"they perform well even decades after purchase" vs. "they’ll last (and be fought over) for generations to come"

The original in orange creates a massive speed bump. I have no idea what the author means by that phrasing. I've literally never heard the words "so hard-wearing" and "perform well" is unclear.

So as a reader, it forces me to pause and go, "WTF does that mean?"

This is a blind spot in action. The writer clearly knows what that phrase means but the reader may not.

The editing library has tons of examples of real edits I've made, changes I've made to them, and explanations as to why. Go check it out if you haven't yet.

And if you love before and after examples and want to finally have a system to catch your blind spots, check out my course Content Editing 101.

To this day, my favorite result is Adelina. Adelina is a freelance writer and after going through the course, her client asked her if she wanted to transition into an in-house editing role because she was asking such good questions. That's kind of insane. Read the story in her own words here.

Hope this helps!

Cheers,

Erica

Check out my 3 courses that 1500+ people have taken, loved, and gotten meaningful results from:

1. Long to Short: Turn one long-form piece into a month's worth of posts. A step-by-step system to repurpose, remix, and remaster your best ideas.

2. Hooked on Writing Hooks: Turn your ideas into content that actually gets consumed. Learn to write scroll-stopping hooks on social without resorting to clickbait nonsense that feels inauthentic.

3. Content Editing 101. Kill decision fatigue and build confidence as a writer and editor. A look inside a professional editor's workflow & best practices. Packed with lessons, examples, and a roadmap so you can stop second-guessing your writing & editing decisions.

Each course is AI-powered 🪄

You can go through them manually or use AI to play, get it done faster, and test your new skills in real time. My friend & prompt genius Rob Lennon wrote all the prompts and bots for the courses.

What'd you think of today's email? Reply and let me know.

Erica Schneider

​​​

​

​