One of my favourite morning activities is to listen to the BBC News on the radio while preparing my breakfast. On one of these occasions, I heard an advertisement for a BBC podcast called Anatomy of a Cancellation, about the controversy around Kate Clanchy. The story intrigued me, especially the role of the publisher.
All the commotion was about Some Kids I Taught and What They Taught Me, a memoir in which the author – an award-winning writer and teacher – provides ‘[a] teacher’s honest, personal account of state education’, as described in a Guardian review in 2019, a few years before the controversy erupted on Twitter. Initially praised and awarded the prestigious Orwell prize, the book was later accused of using racist descriptions of children.
For me, the complete change in attitude towards the book and its author is one of the most interesting aspects of this case. The podcast outlines the sequence of events, allowing Clanchy’s critics to explain their positions and the author to respond. It also explores how the entire affair negatively impacted everyone involved. In doing so, it raises questions about publishing ethics, the dangers of social media and, most importantly, the importance of good, balanced editing!
In fact, I would have liked to hear more about the editing process, but the publisher refused to take part in the podcast. Episode 5 does feature an interview with a sensitivity reader (someone who reads a book to spot offensive content, stereotypes and bias), hired to review an edited version of the memoir. I was really struck by what she said about the emotional impact of words and the author–reader relationship. While I can see why some people are concerned that a sensitivity reader’s involvement could restrict an author’s freedom of speech, I agree that we are responsible for what we write and should always consider the potential hurt that words can cause.
In my opinion, it is one of the editor’s tasks to ensure that language does not reinforce stereotypes, for example by avoiding descriptors that refer to personal attributes such as race, gender, sexual orientation, disability or age (as set out in these Inclusive Language Guidelines). Unless they are relevant and valid. But determining this is apparently not that straightforward!
Your Editing Alternative 