1 The rule in plain terms
The rule is simple: delete intensifiers unless they are doing measurable work. Words such as very, really, quite, extremely, absolutely, and totally usually attach themselves to adjectives and adverbs that already carry the needed force. If a thing is unique, it is not very unique. If a step is essential, it is not really essential. The intensifier adds no new information; it only adds volume.
Correct usage favors the precise word over the modified one. Instead of very tired, write exhausted. Instead of really important, write critical. Instead of quite large, write substantial. The replacement should match the degree the writer intends, not merely sound stronger. When no single word fits, the intensifier may stay, but only if the sentence would otherwise misstate the degree. A very small margin, for example, tells the reader that the margin is not just small but near the threshold of significance.
The common error is treating intensifiers as free emphasis. They are not free. Each one dilutes the word it modifies and trains readers to discount the writer's adjectives. The rule bends when the degree itself is the point, but that is rarer than most drafts suggest.
2 Why editors enforce it
Editors enforce the rule because intensifiers are a reliable symptom of loose thinking. When a writer reaches for very, the odds are good that the underlying word is approximate. The copy desk's job is to make the writer choose: either the plain adjective is accurate, or a stronger one is available. Either way, the reader gets a sharper claim.
There is also a rhythm argument. Intensifiers pile up in predictable places, especially in leads and conclusions, where writers feel pressure to sound authoritative. The result is prose that sounds like a memo trying to persuade itself. Cutting the intensifiers exposes the actual assertion, which is usually more interesting and more defensible. A sentence that says the plan is risky is easier to test than one that says the plan is very risky.
Finally, consistency matters. If one story uses very significant and another uses significant for the same degree, readers cannot calibrate. Editors enforce the rule to keep degree words meaningful across a publication. The goal is not to ban emphasis but to make emphasis earn its place.
3 Where writers usually slip
The most common slip is the double intensifier: very, very important, really quite useful, extremely unique. The second modifier rarely adds anything the first did not already claim. Another frequent slip is the intensifier plus absolute term, as in completely perfect, totally destroyed, or absolutely essential. Perfect and destroyed are already absolute; completely and totally are redundant. Essential may admit degrees in some contexts, but absolutely essential usually signals that the writer has not decided what essential means.
Writers also slip when they use intensifiers to soften a claim they are unsure about. A sentence like the change was fairly significant tries to have it both ways: it asserts significance while hedging the degree. The copy desk should ask whether the change was significant or not. If the evidence supports significant, drop fairly. If it does not, the problem is the claim, not the modifier.
A third slip is intensifier inflation in quotations and paraphrases. When summarizing someone's position, writers often add very or extremely to convey enthusiasm. That is a form of editorializing. The fix is to quote the degree or drop it. The rule applies to attributed material as much as to the writer's own assertions.
4 Applying the rule on deadline
On deadline, the fastest method is a targeted search for the usual suspects: very, really, quite, extremely, absolutely, totally, completely, and highly. Read each hit and ask whether deleting the word changes the meaning. If it does not, delete it. If it does, ask whether a single stronger word would do the job. This takes seconds per instance and usually cuts a paragraph's word count without losing a fact.
When time is tighter, apply the rule to the most visible positions first: headlines, subheads, leads, and closing lines. Intensifiers in those spots are especially costly because they set the tone for the whole piece. A headline that says very rare event is weaker than one that says rare event, and the shorter version is also more likely to fit. In body copy, prioritize intensifiers attached to absolute terms and to already strong adjectives.
A useful desk habit is to mark intensifiers during the first read and resolve them during the second. Do not stop to rewrite every sentence on the first pass; that slows the whole edit. Instead, flag and continue. The second pass becomes a focused cleanup, which is faster than trying to solve word choice and structure at the same time. The rule is not a ban; it is a filter that keeps only the intensifiers that carry information.
5 Legitimate exceptions
The rule bends when the degree is genuinely in dispute. A very small margin, a very large increase, and a quite different result all use the intensifier to distinguish between nearby degrees. In those cases, the modifier is not decoration; it is the claim. The same is true in comparisons: this version is very slightly faster than the last one tells the reader that the difference is real but tiny. Removing very would overstate the gap.
Intensifiers also survive in direct quotations when the speaker's emphasis is part of the record. If a source says the decision was extremely difficult, the copy desk should not silently downgrade it to difficult. The fix, if one is needed, is to shorten the quotation or paraphrase the degree accurately, not to edit the speaker's emphasis away. The rule applies to the writer's prose, not to the evidentiary value of a quote.
A third exception is technical or legal language where a defined term includes the intensifier. If a standard or specification uses very low frequency or highly hazardous, the copy should match the term. In those cases, consistency with the source document outweighs the general preference for lean prose. Outside such defined uses, the burden is on the intensifier to prove it is doing work.
6 A worked example from the copy desk
Consider this draft sentence: The committee's report was very thorough, and its recommendations were really quite important for the agency's future. The intensifiers are very, really, and quite. None of them adds a fact. The copy desk would first ask what thorough means here: did the report cover every required area, or did it go beyond them? If it covered every area, thorough is enough. If it went beyond, comprehensive or exhaustive may be the better word. The first clause becomes The committee's report was thorough or The committee's report was comprehensive.
The second clause has the same problem. Really and quite modify important, which is already a judgment. The editor should ask: important in what way? If the recommendations affect the agency's core mission, critical or consequential may be precise. If they affect only the next budget cycle, significant may be too strong. The revised clause might read its recommendations were critical to the agency's future or its recommendations were consequential for the agency's future. The point is not to make the sentence fancier; it is to make the degree explicit.
After the edit, the sentence is shorter and more testable. If a reader challenges the claim, the writer can point to the report's scope or the recommendations' effects. The original sentence, by contrast, invites the reader to supply the emphasis. That is the copy desk's core objection: intensifiers outsource the judgment to the reader instead of stating it.
7 Quick reference and related rules
Quick reference: delete very, really, quite, extremely, absolutely, totally, completely, and highly unless the degree is the point. Replace the intensifier plus weak adjective with one precise word. Do not stack intensifiers. Do not modify absolutes such as perfect, unique, or destroyed. In quotations, preserve the speaker's emphasis or paraphrase the degree accurately. In defined technical terms, match the source.
Related rules include the preference for concrete nouns and active verbs, which often removes the need for intensifiers altogether. A sentence with a strong verb rarely needs an adverb of degree. The same logic applies to hedges such as somewhat, rather, and fairly: they often signal an unresolved claim. The copy desk should treat them as prompts to verify the degree, not as automatic deletions.
Another related rule is the ban on redundant modifiers, such as free gift or advance planning. Intensifiers are a subset of that problem: they repeat a degree the word already carries. Finally, watch for intensifier inflation in headlines and leads, where the pressure to sound urgent is strongest. The fix is the same everywhere: state the fact, choose the precise word, and let the reader feel the weight without being told to.