I have invited specialists and professionals to write blog articles for our website. I recently tried to publish such an article but my employer decided to 'correct' some of the sentence structure. The article hasn't changed, and the corrections weren't necessary, IMO.
Should we meddle with someone else's article? Especially when we (I) asked for it? Isn't there a rule about this somewhere?
I think all publishers, which is what you are in this case, use an editor.
Although, necessary edits vs. unnecessary edits can completely be a matter of opinion. Or rather, it is a matter of opinion whether or not an edit is necessary. I mean, editing can be an opinionated process, in determining what is necessary.
You see what I mean.
If I wrote and article for a website outside of me, unless they changed the actual meaning of what I was trying to say, I would expect it to be edited grammatically etc. even if I thought the edits were stupid.
So Ginny that would mean then if the documents were not previously published then they are not copyrighted until time of publication. Right? Which would then mean that technically it is allowable to edit them prior to publication and the new, edited version is then the copyrighted version?
Although I do still stand that it is not correct to edit the work of anyone without expression permission.
She just changed some of the Dr.'s sentences around a bit. They still basically read the same. I just felt that it was unnecessary to fiddle with someone else's writing unless it was to correct a typo or grammar error.
I went ahead and published it with her edits and sent him a heads up stating that if he didn't like her edits I would pull it ASAP.
When I request articles from clinicians, etc., for our company newsletter I usually try to edit them as little as possible. I might make minor changes, but I usually send the final version for their review prior to publishing so they have the opportunity to complain if they really hate of even notice my changes.