poor editorial

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "poor editorial" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to describe a piece of writing or publication that has substandard editing or lacks quality in its editorial process. Example: "The article was difficult to read due to the poor editorial choices made throughout the piece."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

12 human-written examples

When people raised a stink about Apple's poor editorial judgment, the company reversed its position, which proves my point.

The Guardian - Tech

As a character, Newcastle had become blurred beyond recognition, vitiated not by poor research but by poor editorial judgment.

The New York Times - Books

New York's purchase of public health insurance for the working poor (editorial, June 4) is a critical first step to reduce the number of uninsured.

The New York Times

We applaud you for urging the Census Bureau to adopt a more realistic measure of poverty in "Counting the Poor" (editorial, April 17).

The New York Times

Though the Dublin-based publisher said the matter warranted "immediate investigation", which is under way, it believed termination of the title would be "disproportionate to a poor editorial decision".

The Guardian

Your statement in "Long-Term Help for the Poor" (editorial, Feb. 25) that President Bush reneged on his commitment to fight global AIDS disregards unprecedented progress against this disease.

The New York Times

Human-verified similar examples from authoritative sources

Similar Expressions

40 human-written examples

There are 16 states in which Medicaid does not pay for routine circumcision, and this may exacerbate the problem among the poor, the editorial said.

The New York Times

You are correct to note that drug companies need special incentives to develop vaccines for diseases that primarily affect the world's poorest countries (editorial, March 14).

The New York Times

"Poor Gerhard Schröder," the editorial says.

The New York Times

What is not addressed in "Pricing the Poor Out of College" (editorial, March 27) is the relative financial burdens borne by students from lower-income families.

The New York Times

This was despite comments from our auditors in the last Living our values report, which noted poor progress on the editorial side, saying: "it is all the more important that effort is focused on meeting this year's more ambitious target".

The Guardian

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When criticizing editorial quality, be specific about what aspects are lacking, such as fact-checking, clarity, or coherence.

Common error

Avoid simply stating that the editorial is "poor". Instead, explain why it is poor by pointing out specific weaknesses in the content or process.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "poor editorial" functions as an adjective phrase modifying a noun (usually implicitly like 'judgment', 'decision', 'quality', etc.). It describes something related to editorial work that is of low quality or substandard.

Expression frequency: Rare

Frequent in

News & Media

67%

Science

33%

Formal & Business

0%

Less common in

Academia

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "poor editorial" is a grammatically correct and usable expression in English, typically employed to denote substandard quality in editing or overall editorial work. Ludwig AI confirms that this phrase is valid and commonly used. While its frequency is relatively rare, its primary contexts lie within News & Media and Scientific domains. When using the phrase, be specific about the shortcomings you're addressing, rather than simply stating a general critique. Consider using alternatives like "substandard editing" or "inferior editorial quality" for nuanced emphasis.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

substandard editing

Focuses more on the editing process itself rather than the overall editorial quality.

inferior editorial quality

Emphasizes the low quality of the editorial work.

weak editorial judgment

Highlights the lack of sound decision-making in the editorial process.

deficient editorial oversight

Points out the inadequate supervision during the editorial process.

flawed editorial process

Indicates that the process itself has problems or shortcomings.

inadequate editorial control

Suggests a lack of control over the editorial content and quality.

careless editing

Highlights the lack of attention to detail in the editing.

negligent editorial practices

Implies a failure to exercise due care in the editorial procedures.

badly edited

A more straightforward way of saying the editing was not good.

shoddy editing

Emphasizes the low quality and carelessness of the editing.

FAQs

How can I describe editorial work that is not up to standard?

You can use phrases like "substandard editing", "inferior editorial quality", or "weak editorial judgment" to convey the same idea.

What are the signs of a "poor editorial"?

Signs include factual inaccuracies, unclear writing, inconsistent style, lack of coherence, and absence of proper fact-checking.

Is "poor editorial" a formal or informal expression?

"Poor editorial" is a neutral expression suitable for both formal and informal contexts, although more specific and detailed language is often preferred in formal writing.

What is the difference between "poor editorial" and "editorial bias"?

"Poor editorial" refers to the overall quality of the editorial process and content, while "editorial bias" indicates a leaning towards a particular viewpoint or agenda.