It took a couple of tries, but these images from California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's inauguration were finally accepted at SS. They were originally rejected on technicalities...focal point, purple fringing, and limited commercial value respectively.
So what makes a good editorial image? It's not technical perfection, that's for sure! These images are far from perfect. All were shot at 1600 ISO without a flash and with a less than ideal aperature setting (4.5 on the color guard, and 5.6 on the other two). They had a ton of noise and are somewhat soft. Nevertheless, these are all sound editorial images.
It's the historical and newsworthy significance that makes a good editorial image. When I asked for a re-evaluation based on those merits instead of technical merits (and admitting to recongizing the flaws), they were all accepted. A news photo editor interested in a shot of a political gathering or inauguration or the governor and his wife isn't going to care if there is a slight imperfection. They are interested in the event and the people above all. They also recognize that this is a once-in-a-lifetime event that cannot be reshot in order to acheive technical perfection.
What do you think makes a good editorial image?