Journalists, designers and photojournalists can all make vivid portfolios to showcase their work. For an editor, however, more specifically a copy editor, it's much harder to show your skills. You can show an article that is grammatically sound and all the facts check up, but couldn't the writer have done that on his own? How can you show what you can offer?
I think a lot of this links back to how copy editors can be the unsung heroes of a publication. They don't get a lot of credit for their work and you only really hear about them when they let an error slip through. So are copy editors stuck to having a storied resume and a good reviews from the editor in chief to prove their mettle? That sounds a little less appealing than having a resume full of eye-grabbing layouts or infographics. But perhaps that's just the nature of the industry and good managing editors will still be able to see a good copy editor when one comes along, despite there being little to show for it.
