Editing

Blogging has a serious downside.  The writer, for this one me, can type anything he wants, then after publication let the open market decide who wants to read the thoughts.  This has expanded to much social media where any hateful troll can share a paragraph with no regulation of content or suggestions of how thoughts might have been expressed better.  Moderators do not help much.  They act as gatekeepers but do not refine content.  Human editors have a more mixed role.  For their own reporters or writers they alter the sentences to make them more appealing to readers.  For free-lancers or Letters to the Editor they function primarily as arbiters of what readers might see but also will amend expression, though not ideas.

We enter a new age, that of AI editing.  One of my writing programs allows me one AI feedback every calendar day.  Pattern recognition has become awesome.  The judgments of the computer can be slashing at times, lacking any sensitivity that a professional might have in reviewing manuscripts or content.  The pattern recognition cannot regulate what is written but probably can make the writing more coherent.  It can identify tone, variability of sentences, and how well paragraphs flow in sequence.

Since my use is rationed, I am reluctant to copy and paste an article from an upper tier publication and see how they judge published writing already screened and selected by a human professional among competing submissions.  Perhaps the pattern recognition would critique those essays much as it does mine.

Still, I appreciate somebody, or really an emotionless program, taking a look at what my mind expresses.