They want to work with writers – be they on staff or freelance – who routinely come up with interesting ideas for stories that are perfect for their readership and then deliver on said stories with minimum drama, maximum efficiency, on deadline and free of factual, grammatical and spelling errors.

That’s the gist of what three leading business editors had to say when they talked during a recent teleconference hosted by the Society of American Business Editors and Writers (SABEW).

The editors, Al Scott, managing editor of the Puget Sound Business Journal; Dave Kansas, chief markets commentator and former European markets editor at The Wall Street Journal; Derek DeCloet, a business reporter and editor at the (Toronto) Globe and Mail, and Bernie Kohn, a business editor at Bloomberg News, conducted the hour-long teleconference to help editors of newspaper business sections, business weeklies and other business news publications do their jobs better.

But it was easy to flip what they were saying on its head and use it as an instruction manual for how reporters and freelancers could do their jobs better too.

Based on their advice, as well as some of my own, here are 10 things you can do to make editors fall in love with your work, regardless what you write about:

1. Craft story ideas with a publication’s readers in mind. Make sure story pitches answer the question: why would the readers of this publication care? You can be sure editors read your pitches with that question in the back of their minds, so take the guesswork out of the process, and build the answer into your query. If you play your cards right, you might be able to use it as the nut graph in your story (more on that below). “If budget lines get (editors) excited that’s a good sign,” Scott says.

2. Don’t be afraid to talk. Some editors prefer to talk over ideas or completed manuscripts by phone, others prefer email and yet others like to keep an IM channel open on days they’re doing line edits so they can quickly ask questions and get answers on your story without having to check email. No matter what method they prefer, don’t be afraid to talk to an editor. One five-minute phone call can mean the difference between being frustrated by an assignment (or editor) or not.

3. Include a nut graph. It doesn’t matter if you’re writing 250 words or 2,500, include a explainer paragraph fairly high up that describes what a piece is about and how it fits into the overall context of a topic. Both help explain why readers should care, and as a result, read what you’ve written. For short stories, the nut graph can also serve as the lead. If you can’t explain in one concise paragraph what the story is about and why readers should care then chances are the premise of your article isn’t fully baked. If that’s the case, the editors suggested trying to explain what the story is about in 25 words or less to a friend or family member. And if all else fails, ask for help. “The challenge for nut graphs is the biggest in stories that writers are very close to, or on subjects that are moving very quickly,” DeCloet says.

4. Stick to simple story structures. To a person, editors on the SABEW teleconference call said they preferred longer stories written in chronological order v. structured in any other way. They’re easier for readers to comprehend.

5. Don’t skimp on details. Besides a strong lead and simple story structure, one of the most important elements of good storytelling is detail, and that comes from good reporting. The A1 stories that the Wall Street Journal is famous for depend on it, Kansas says. “The internal joke is that we want to know what they ate for dinner and the color of the clothes they were wearing….to show the thesis unfolding v. just telling it,” he says. “That’s very challenging for organizations to have enough time to do that kind of reporting. But at the end of the day, you need strong reporting.”

6. Submit stories with headlines and decks. By including a headline, even if you don’t have to, you show an editor you know what the story’s about and that you’re creative and helpful. Many news organizations have eliminated copy desks and now rely on editors and writers to come up with headlines and decks. By writing your own, you’re making your editor’s job that much easier, which will give them that much more time to spend on other things, like giving you more assignments.

7. De-”was-ify” copy before turning it in. That’s the term one editor on the call created to describe how he regularly goes through his reporters’ stories to remove  instances of passive voice. Once your story’s finished, read it through one more time to make sure everything’s in active voice, and to check on grammar and spellings.

8. File stories in a publication’s preferred format. Some publications don’t care whether you write in 12 point Times New Roman or 14 point Arial or if your paragraphs are indented or separated by a line of white space as long as your story is in on time and free of errors. Others need stories to fit into a specific format because it makes it easier for them to load into their content management system. Find out what your editor prefers. If you’re filing directly into a content management system – which is becoming more common – make sure you follow any rules about character counts for headlines or decks or for adding links, meta tags and other SEO elements.

9. Don’t get defensive about rewrites. To a person, editors on the SABEW teleconference said they go out of their way to handle requests for rewrites so as do to the least amount of damage to the writer’s work or ego as possible. Some use the sandwich method – praising what they can before and after pointing out what needs to be reworked. “It’s a tricky thing if you’re dealing with something the reporter has a strong emotional investment in,” Kansas says. If you know you have to have a difficult conversation with a writer, “steel yourself by reminding yourself that you’re the reader’s agent,” he says. “They may be your writer, but in that conversation you represent the person who’s picking up the paper, magazine, or reading the wire service and if you put yourself in that mindset and ask questions that start with why, how and what, you’ll extract some answers that will help (the writer) focus.”

10. Stay in touch. If you write for a publication on a regular basis – or even if you want to – check in with your editor(s) on a regular basis to let them know the status of any stories you’re working on and any ideas that you’ve come up with since the last time you talked. Editors would prefer to know in advance if you’re having trouble lining up sources, coming up with a lead or running into other snags. And by sharing ideas, you can get their input on the angle or direction of a story you’re thinking about pursuing. Of course the latter may not work with every publication you work with – especially if you’re afraid they’ll take your ideas and assign them to other writers. But it’s the way editors operate with their in-house writers, so by copying that process you’ll be a team player.

When you’re having trouble finding the linchpin source for a story, who do you turn to for advice?

When you’re thick into writing and need help deciding whether to trim or enhance a certain part of the narrative, who do you ask?

When a critical source agrees to an interview, but only if it’s off the record, who do you consult to see if it’s OK?

Chances are the answer to all these is the same: your editor.

But here’s something that most editors won’t tell you: they don’t know everything.

They may have dealt with a particular situation before. In other cases, it might be something they’ve never encountered. If that’s the case, whatever advice they’re giving you they’re probably making up as they go along.

That’s probably not what you wanted to hear. As writers, we want to know that our editors have all the answers. We want them to make the right decision 100 percent of the time, and as a result, make our reporting and writing better too.

But that’s just not the case. Editors, though they hold more power than writers in the general editorial scheme of things, are not infallible – though some I’ve known liked to think they were.

More likely than not, if you bring a problem to an editor they’ll come up with a solution based on:

• The publication’s editorial policies
• Personal experience
• The experiences of other writers at that publication or at others they’ve worked for
• Consensus opinion from publication’s other editors
• What their editor friends and acquaintances have done
• Advice from a professional association
• Advice of publication’s legal counsel
• All of the above

Even then they could get it wrong. They may tell you to zig when, after all is said and done, you realize you should have zagged.

So the next time you have a question about a story, don’t ask yourself, “What would my editor say?” Instead ask, “What would I do about this if I were in my editor’s shoes?” If you’ve worked for a particular publication for any length of time or have a good working relationship with a given editor, chances are good you know the answer without having to ask the question.

I’m not advocating that writers not check in with editors when they run into trouble. On the contrary, I’m a huge fan of communicating with editors early and often.

But instead of framing a query as “I need help!” frame it as “Here’s what’s happening and here’s what I think I should do.” Editors will appreciate the fact that you’ve thought about the situation and come up with some solutions.

Not only will it endear you to your editor, working in that kind of problem-solving mode will serve you well if you ever end up working as an editor.

Editors pay for how you think.

It doesn’t take much thinking to punch out those 300-word SEO gems that some websites rely on to corral traffic in order to build up page views and make more from advertising revenue. If content farms only pay pennies (or less) per word, how hard can that be, right?

Whether any self-respecting professional writer should willing take on those easy, lowest common denominator jobs is a point that continues to be debated in writing circles.

But, ladies and gentlemen, there is one surefire way to separate yourself from the pack, from the SEO writers, from the would-bes and coulda beens.

You think.

Good writing is good thinking, and more and more I’m convinced that’s what editors are looking for. Not just writers who can think, but writers who can articulate their thoughts in a way that other people, i.e., readers, can understand.

What does it mean to be a writer who can think? It means:

• Finding a new approach to a worn-out subject.
• Picking a view that’s contrary to popular wisdom and coming up with supporting evidence to back up your opinion.
• Sifting through the countless blogs, RSS feeds, press releases and the other floatsam and jetsam you come across each day to piece together a trend where nobody else sees one.
• Understanding why something or someone is newsworthy and being able to make a convincing argument to an editor for why they should run a story about it in their publication – and why you should be the one to write it.
• Good, old-fashioned digging, whether through computer databases or an afternoon spent in the county courthouse reading old lawsuits or bankruptcy filings.
• Being able to deftly paraphrase a long-winded source rather than rely only on quotes to move a story along.
• Great translation skills, so you can read a paper in a medical journal, a patent or a press release on a new optics technology and explain in plain English what it means to a reader and why they should care.

It doesn’t matter if you’re writing straight news, features, blog posts or essays, editors want writers who can provide that deep analysis of why something is happening, or is the way it is, or ask the hard questions.

When anyone can read about a particular event – whether it’s this year’s mid-term elections, rioters protesting the French governments’ attempts to push retirement to 62 or what happened on last night’s episode of Man Men, it’s the original thinking you put into your research, reporting and writing that wins over readers, and editors.

The same holds true in the writing profession. Because you’ve got a way with words doesn’t mean you’ve got a way with people, and editors have to be good with both.

If and when you’re ever approached about an opportunity for a freelance editing job, should you take it?

To work as a freelance editor, you need to be:

Organized – So you can keep track of writers, deadlines and all the other details that come with the job.

Creative – To come up with story ideas from press releases, news stories, trade magazines, convention speeches and the other sources you’ll no doubt be tracking to stay on top of the subject matter covered by the publication you’re working for. You’ll also need creativity to see how writers’ pitches fit into the publication’s editorial strategy, or whether pitches that are slightly off target can be tweaked slightly, or whether writers whose pitches are far off the mark are still candidates for other stories based on the  strength of their writing.

Decisive – Face it, when you’re the editor, you’re in charge, and the inflow of questions is constant. Is it OK to quote this person anonymously? This source doesn’t meet the exact parameters of what we needed, can I use them anyway? Is it OK if I file Friday instead of Wednesday? What do you think of this photo to illustrate the story? It’s no job for someone who can’t make up their mind.

A good communicator – Editing is all about collaboration, with writers, fellow editors, the publisher, and yes, sometimes even the sales staff. You need to be able to share ideas in a constructive way. If a writer turns in a story that’s a mess, you need to be able to explain what’s wrong and how they can fix it without making them feel to crummy about it. And if they turn in a masterpiece, you need to be able to sing their praises. You also have to be able to defend why you handled a story or a part of a story a certain way to whoever you’re working for.

Detail oriented – So you can copy edit stories and not let typos, bad links or factual errors fall through the cracks.

A multi-tasker – So you can juggle multiple stories in multiple stages of being finished while at the same time assigning stories for one or more future issues, choosing or assigning photos or other art, dealing with housekeeping tasks such as processing invoices, and helping with promotional activities, which these days involves using social media such as Twitter and Facebook to get the word out.

Punctual – Because when you’re an editor, the number of deadlines multiplies exponentially. Not only do editors met out deadlines to writers, they’ve got their own deadlines for turning in finished story packages, making assignments, etc.

A team player – When you’re an editor, you’re part of a bigger team producing the magazine, newsletter, website or whatever it is you’re working on, and you need to be able to play nice with the other members of the team - even if you aren’t physically working with them. That means making yourself available to your team as they need you, whether that’s the occasional 6 a.m. PST conference call with the East Coast editors, or the 8 p.m. PST call from a freelancer who can only call after their day job ends.

A good negotiator – Because if you’re being hired as an editor, there’s probably a contract involved, and to get the best deal for yourself you need to be able to ascertain which contract terms are reasonable and necessary and which aren’t, then articulate and defend your position, but be willing to give a little so both sides are satisfied with the deal.

If you’ve worked as a freelance editor, what qualities or characteristics helped prepare you for the job?

Introducing Inside Edge, an online magazine on corporate finance for midsized companies sponsored by American Express and Federated Media.

The site’s still in a soft launch, which means it’s up and running and the sponsors are cranking up their own marketing machinery to formally announce it soon.

But I couldn’t wait any longer to share what I’ve spent so much time working on over the past five months. You can access it at www.GetTheInsideEdge.com or www.americanexpress.com/insideedge.

In addition to providing the team from American Express and Federated that developed the site with direction on editorial content, my main role has been as features editor, planning, assigning and editing stories in the Articles section. The site’s launching with several of these, and you’ll see more added each week.

The site’s still in the early stages and lots more bells and whistles are on the drawing board, including interactive elements that will let readers share stories they like on Facebook, Twitter, etc.

Amex you probably know. If you don’t know Federated Media, it’s a five-year-old San Francisco digital media company that runs ad networks for 100 major blogs including Dooce, Mashable, ReadWriteWeb and VentureBeat. One of Federated’s cofounders is John Battelle, who started The Industry Standard, an Internet industry magazine I wrote for in the late 1990s before the dot-com bust.

American Express hopes the site will gain the same kind of success it’s had with OpenForum, a website for small business Federated Media helped the financial services company launch three years ago. OpenForum runs original stories and videos, content from influential small business and finance blogs, an active community forum and attracts close to 830,000 visitors a month.

Both Inside Edge and OpenForum are what the media industry calls custom publications, that is, magazines – in this case online magazines – produced by a company for its customers. Though not journalism in the strictest sense, at Inside Edge we’re trying nonetheless to provide timely, informative stories on financial matters that midsized companies care about, including expense management, cash flow, credit, and more.

Visit InsideEdge and find out for yourself. I’ll see you there.

Last year was all about hunkering down, sticking with what you were doing, or taking the gigs you were offered even though they might not be your long-term dream assignments.

But in the past few weeks, I’m hearing from writers, editors and publishers who’re making major moves, all of them positive:

• An editor friend got the offer of a lifetime to run a new nonprofit news daily covering a major metropolitan area.
• An author, blogger and ex-newspaper editor got an offer to run a start up being launched by a major magazine company.
• A former daily newspaper business reporter and editor who’d gone to work for a college communication department after being downsized landed a job at the same start up.
• A West Coast media company is looking to full a junior-level website editor and production position on the East Coast as work for their clients there grows.
• A Rocky Mountain area freelance writer and editor reports being crazy busy with assignments, including a series she pitched to a national business publication.
• A Midwest freelance writer is beginning a publicity project for a well-known media training company

I know it’s only anecdotal, but it’s good news all the same.

One more thing: although I don’t know the particulars of every situation, I do know that for the most part, this work didn’t just fall out of the sky for these people. It happened because even while opportunities were frozen solid they were preparing for the day things would start to thaw. How? By staying in touch with their contacts, present and past. By working their virtual and real-word networks. By tinkering with side projects to learn new skills, even if those endeavors didn’t bring in any income.

What’s your good news? Is your business picking up? Are you seeing cracks in the ice? And if so, what did you do to make them happen?

That’s what I found when I started a freelance editing gig, and what I heard from other editors after I wrote that post on the subject not long ago.

So, one freelancer wrote in after reading the post, is there anything that would get an editor to respond to me right away?

Good question. I asked some editor friends for their opinions on what it takes to get them to reply immediately to a writer’s letter of introduction, pitch or completed manuscript.

One says the best way to get a fast response from her is to have a killer story pitch, one “that’s so perfectly honed to the editor’s needs it’s irresistible.” Unfortunately, she doesn’t encounter those very often. “Pitches like that are like snow leopards: hard to spot and in danger of extinction,” she says. “But I get them from time to time, usually from people….who completely understand what the publication needs, and with whom I’ve already had discussions that narrow the topic range.”

Fast Cash Freelance addressed the same topic in this recent post, saying it takes more than a good idea for an editor to bite. According to the post, writers are most likely to hear back from editors if they have access to hard-to-reach sources (think celebrities or CEOs), expertise or first-hand knowledge of a particular topic, or can demonstrate their ability to do tough research to back up a pitch. Dependability, clever word crafting, speed and a contrarian streak aren’t bad either.

In the recent past, I’ve had editors say “yes” to pitches in less than 24 hours on several occasions. Once I started following a high-profile management expert and business columnist on Twitter right before the pub date of her latest business book. After she followed me back, I introduced myself and inquired whether she’d make herself available for an interview about the book and herself. When she said yes, I immediately pitched a Q&A to an editor at a business publication I’d started to write for, and got a yes within a day.

Another time I started following a publisher on Twitter, she followed me back, and based on something I’d seen her tweet, I asked if she’d be interested in a pitch on a related subject. She said yes and DM’d me the name and email of an editor to pitch. I sent a query the same day, and wound up with an assignment less than 24 hours later.

There’s something to be said with being in the right place at the right time, or responding quickly when you get even the smallest opening. But that only works if you understand the publication you’re pitching to, or the subject matter, or preferably both. In other words, do your homework. Then follow through by filing your story on time and error free – so the next time that editor sees an email with your name on it in their inbox, they’ll make the time to look at it and reply right away.

I’m talking about flat in the sense that with so many newspaper and magazine staff jobs going by the wayside, publications don’t have as many middle managers or mid-level editors as there used to be. As a result, many publications are farming work out to independent contractors, editors and writers.

With so much in flux, at any given time the hierarchy of who’s working for whom could change, and the editor you wrote for yesterday maybe the writer you edit tomorrow.

It’s happened to me in the past couple months, as I’ve taken on a new editing project. I’ve found myself assigning stories to not one, not two but three freelance writer/editors who at one time or another I’ve written for while they were either staff or freelance editors. Another writer I’m working with is also a freelance editor who may eventually throw some assignments my way.

If it’s happening to me, it’s got to be happening to other writers too.

So how do you act when your boss today may be the person reporting to you tomorrow?

1. Quit thinking of writer-editor relationships as ‘us v. them.’ Constantly pitting yourself against editors because of perceived bad treatment – lousy contract language, unreasonable deadlines, crummy editing or late payments -  makes you a victim. If you’re not happy about aspects of a writing opportunity you have the power to make a choice: negotiate new terms, walk away, or accept the fact that the terms are lousy but you’re taking the assignment anyway. Yes, sometimes the editor you’re dealing with is disorganized, mean or incompetent. But in many situations, problems you encounter may be beyond their control. If you run into trouble the best thing to do is talk, via email or better yet, by phone.

2. Approach the editor-writer relationship as one of equals. One’s not better than the other, just responsible for different things. Editors translate ideas into stories suitable for their audience, sit through a lot of meetings, buffer writers from demands – reasonable or otherwise – of editors and other publication staff higher up the food chain and prep articles for prime time. Writers are editors’ eyes and ears on the front lines, keeping tabs on what’s happening out in the world to come up with interesting, relevant stories. If you think of what editors and writers do as being different parts of the same enterprise, you’ll have more appreciation for what the other does, and it’ll show in your working relationships.

3. If you’re a writer, think like an editor. Editors keep track of multiple details for multiple projects for multiple issues simultaneously. Some go so far as to use Excel spreadsheets or project management apps to keep things straight. If you’re a writer, you can help them and yourself by thinking like an editor. Don’t turn in stories until you’ve gone over them with the eyes of a copyeditor. If you’re responsible for turning in elements that run with the story such as headlines, decks, inks, file art, sidebars, subheads, etc., send everything with your original draft – along with your invoice – instead of waiting for an editor to remind you. If you have aspirations to work as an editor, being organized about those types of details is good practice, gets you noticed, and it could pay off if you ever want to ask for a recommendation.

4. If you’re an editor, think like a writer. As an editor, if you say yes to a query, talk through what your expectations are of the writer and for the story at the very beginning so everyone’s expectations are the same. Because of their status, editors often have access to people and information writers might not. Sharing that information with a writer could help them with a story they’re working on, which helps you in the long run.

5. Be considerate in all your business relationships. I write a lot about workplace issues and in the last couple months have done a few pieces of employee rewards and recognition programs. My take away – you don’t have to give people money or stuff to make them feel good about doing their job, or about working with you. A small amount of courtesy goes a long way – an email to say thanks for an assignment, or a Twitter status update on how awesome someone is to work with. When the holidays roll around, you don’t necessarily need to send gifts to editors you work for – though last Christmas I did send something small to editors I’d worked with over the year.

Do you work as an editor and writer? What advice do you have for getting along in a flatter media world?

The top 25 reasons editors don’t get back to you faster:

1. They’re in a meeting.

2. They’re working on next year’s editorial calendar, which is late, and they still haven’t quite figured out what stories they’re doing when.

3. They’re in the run up to a day-long webinar for 3,000 subscribers the publication is hosting and haven’t thought of anything else for days.

4. They’re at a publishing industry convention figuring out how to do more with less.

5. They’re covering a convention.

6. They’re in another meeting.

7. They’re flying to a meeting.

8. They’re editing stories that have to go up on the site tomorrow.

9. Their 2010 budget is due and they’re figuring out how they can get by without having to cut freelance rates or lay someone off.

10. They’re unorganized.

11. They read your story/pitch/letter of introduction and are still trying to figure out where you or it could fit into the general scheme of things.

12. They read your story/pitch/letter of introduction and are still trying to figure out how to politely tell you thanks but no thanks.

13. They read your story/pitch/letter of introduction and are still trying to figure out how to tell you that you or it are fantastic but due to budget cuts they’re only paying 25 cents/word right now.

14. They’re getting fired, quitting or getting downsized out of a job.

15. They’re working on the editorial plan for a spin-off publication the publisher asked them to take on in addition to their regular responsibilities.

16. They’re working a column/letter from the editor/feature story and have locked themselves in a room with no phone or Internet access because it’s the only way they’ll ever get any writing done.

17. They’re hosting an editorial roundtable with industry bigwigs for their publications’ annual CEO perspective issue.

18. They’re in a day-long session with the publication’s market research team plotting out what reader surveys they need to do next year and how much it’ll cost.

19. They’re in bluelines.

20. They’re blogging.

21. They’re planning the company Christmas party.

22. They’re planning where they’re going to go over Christmas break.

23. They’re decluttering/cleaning/organizing their office.

24. They’re interviewing candidates for next semester’s internships.

25. They’re in, you guessed it, another meeting.

You’ll have to subscribe to the paper in print or online or borrow a copy from a friend to see AOL to Produce News, Video by the Numbers in its entirety. But here are some of the relevant details:

• AOL will rely on a new digital newsroom system that uses computer algorithms to predict what types of stories, videos or photos will be popular, then assign articles accordingly.
• Here’s where freelancers come in. Stories will be assigned to freelancers via a new Web site called Seed.com. According to the story, AOL already works with a network of 3,000 freelancers but is looking to increase that number through Seed.com, “which is open to anyone looking to submit a story.” In other words, not necessarily professional writers. Note: The Seed.com website isn’t much to look at just yet, but they will take your email address and promise to get back to you after they launch, if you’re so inclined.
• Under the new system, AOL’s freelance fees will range from nothing up front and a share of ad revenue to more than $100 per story.
• According to the WSJ story, AOL will offer advertisers “the chance to work with its editorial team to create custom content.” In other words custom publishing. While there’s nothing wrong with that, it’s not exactly journalism, and hopefully won’t be labeled as such.

The WSJ story used the recent baby crib recall as an example of how AOL’s new system would work. If the new system had been up and running, according to the article, the company’s number-crunching wizardry would have determined that people were interested in seeing more stories on the subject, which would have prompted editors to assign more stories.

To which I can only say: no duh. Any editor worth their salt would have come to the same conclusion, and wouldn’t have needed a lot of computer algorithms to do it.

All this is being directed by Tim Armstrong, the former Google advertising exec who’s slated to take over as AOL’s CEO when Time Warner completes spinning off the Internet company in December.

Some of my freelance friends are already up in arms over the whole situation. They’re ready to put AOL into the same group as Demand Studios, Associated Content, Helium, Studio101 and other sites that I’ve called content aggregators but other freelancers have dubbed content mills for the paltry amounts they pay, whether to professional writers or hobbyists, to churn out how-tos and other articles based on topics that are more prized for how high they’ll turn up in keyword searches than for their reportage.

But other freelancers I know who work on AOL’s blogs and other news enterprises have nothing but good things to say about the working conditions, including friendly editors and decent money.

For now, it remains to be seen whether AOL’s new endeavor will turn out to be a legitimate new market for freelance work, or give new meaning to the term bad seed.

Whatever happens, it’s also worth noting that AOL is the latest in a string of companies that most people would identify as technology ventures getting into the media business, a growing list that includes Google, Microsoft and Yahoo. As newspapers continue to struggle, are these tech giants the real future of the news?