News, Tips &
Advice for Freelance Writers, Editors and Filmmakers
Demand Listens to the People
By Demand Studios Review Editorial
Posted On 10/19/10:
Today was one of the most dramatic in Demand Studios
history.
Sometime around late afternoon or early evening, depending what part of the
country you're in (not sure what time it was in the UK), Demand Studios writers and editors found an announcement
at the top of their work desk.
It informed them that abstracts from scientific articles had been banned as
references.
It went over like New Coke.
The forum posting the announcement linked to took all of two minutes to
start collecting angry and dismayed posts from Demand Studios contributors shocked and annoyed by the decision.
Many pointed out that it didn't seem to make sense that you could cite a journalist, potentially with questionable
motivations and qualifications, writing about the study, but that you couldn't cite the abstract from the study
itself.
The reason given for this ban was that writers may misinterpret the abstract and give
false information. One poster pointed out that a misinterpretation is more likely by reading the entire
article itself than just the abstract, which is one of the reasons an abstract is written.
After all, sometimes the point can get lost in all that information. The
abstract boils it down to its essence and delivers the conclusion in a succinct, easy to understand couple of
paragraphs.
Only one poster seemed to agree that banning abstracts made any sense. (There's
always one.)
Within four hours or so, the decision was overturned and abstracts were once again
fair game.
I must say I'm (pleasantly) surprised. I was hoping they'd reconsider, but didn't
expect it.
Looks like if enough Demand Studios freelancers ban together and let their voices
be heard, they can at least occasionally make a difference.
Remember this, people. You aren't powerless cogs in the Demand Studios machine.
Good work speaking up. Don't let this be the last time.