Workmanlike Is Better Than Exquisite: For Some Ghostwriters, an Unpleasant Insight

My first writing job was at a newsletter publisher where substance was much more highly valued than style. In fact, came the edict from the boss, “Ugly sells.”

The theory being that readers of trade newsletters liked their rags “ugly”—here was what one of our leading competitors looked like in 1969, and 1992 …

… because it had an air of down-and-dirty, just-off-the-mimeograph-machine authenticity.

Well, that was hard for the graphic designers, who had gone to school just like us writers. (They took it out on us by never reading our copy, one of them telling me when a column ran short, “Dave, you need to write some more shit.”)

I thought of all that last week when I read some LinkedIn advice by Jake Meth, who helps corporate leaders craft and pitch op-ed pieces for major publications:

Journalists are looking for you to supply the deep insights and knowledge that come from knowing your particular issue exceptionally well. The kind of insights and knowledge they can’t supply themselves.

When I was an editor, and reviewed a pitch that had impressive writing by someone who wasn’t a professional writer, I sometimes became suspicious. I assumed that this person must have worked with a ghostwriter or writing assistant. That detracted from the purity of their message, and made me feel less inclined to run the piece. …

If you’re trying hard to impress an editor with your writing ability, you’re not spending enough energy on making your argument airtight and supporting it as best you can.

Editors are good at gussying up your prose. That’s their job! Let them handle it.

But what if you are a ghostwriter or writing assistant? Are you supposed to write badly, to give your boss more credibility? No. No self-respecting writer could bring herself to do that … and self-respecting is the only kind of writer you should hire.

Here’s how a writer might think about it:

Ghostwrite your op-eds fundamentally. Rock-solid research and unanswerable arguments, expressed in good nouns and good verbs. No single sentence will sing, but the whole piece will stand out as a rare example of constructive, credible, compelling communication.

And you know what? Maybe lose the alliteration.