Copy editors are very important and too rarely praised.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
There are two kinds of editors, those who correct your copy and those who say it's wonderful.
Most writers adore their editors, and I'm no exception.
That's why editors and publishers will never be obsolete: a reader wants someone with taste and authority to point them in the direction of the good stuff, and to keep the awful stuff away from their door.
It doesn't matter that millions read as long as you share it with somebody. So I don't really think about readers or editors. You especially should never think of editors - especially never think about reviewers.
Most editors are just worried about their jobs. They're overwhelmed. They're underpaid. They do the best they can.
In a world where everyone is a publisher, no one is an editor. And that is the danger that we face today.
Writers who are activists are very rarely taken seriously as artists.
Writers have to put up with this editor thing; it is ageless and eternal and wrong.
Does advertising corrupt editors? Yes it does, but fewer editors than you may suppose... the vast majority of editors are incorruptible.
One should fight like the devil the temptation to think well of editors. They are all, without exception - at least some of the time, incompetent or crazy.