Guidelines: An Editorial Nightmare

Reading Time

Being a writer who wants to be published in a legit publication, I have always spent a considerable amount of time mulling over the guidelines of a magazine I want to submit to. There are a lot of obvious reasons for doing this, but the most important reason, for me, is to make sure that my submission is properly formatted, is submitted correctly, and fits into the magazine or anthology’s theme or editorial direction–maybe those are the only real reasons for reading guidelines.
But now that I’m editing a magazine–well, it’s turning out to be more of a journal than a magazine, to be honest–I’ve discovered that I must be a minority among writers. I don’t know what it is, but since opening up submissions to the general public we’ve been hit with a series of submissions that simply weren’t correct. One submission was from a 45-year-old woman from Argentina who wanted payment through Western Union. The problem? SBS Magazine only accepts submissions from writers under the age of 25 (and we’re a tad lenient on that age, but not lenient enough to add a year to it). To top it off, we specifically stated in our very organized guidelines that payment is made through Paypal. Another fellow submitted to the wrong email address while responding to an ad that I had put up. I emailed him back and told him to read the guidelines to figure out where to submit to.
And this has made me want to give a little advice to folks out there wanting to submit to a magazine or journal somewhere:

  • Read the guidelines. They’re not put there to be pretty. Editors want you to read them and submit properly for a lot of reasons.
  • Don’t assume that your submission that doesn’t follow the guidelines will be so good that the editors will ignore that you’ve not followed guidelines and publish it anyway. In fact, of the submissions that have been sent to us that didn’t follow guidelines, we rejected them without reading them, and other editors do this too–and we’re pretty lenient. True, SBS Magazine isn’t Analog or F&SF, and we don’t have thousands of submissions a month, but the guidelines aren’t that hard to read and there are certain things we’re not willing to be lenient on–like age. But editors at bigger magazines won’t read your submission at all if it’s off target–say submitting a poem to a magazine that only publishes fiction. They don’t have the time or patience for you if you can’t even read the guidelines.
  • Editors aren’t trying to be mean an anal when they reject your manuscript because it doesn’t follow guidelines. Most, if not all, magazine editors have a certain direction they want the magazine to go. Analog only publishes hard SF and nonfiction essays on certain aspects of science that might be of interest to readers of the magazine. Other magazines have a wider audience, or at least have no genre specifications, but look for certain types of writing as opposed to any type. So, if your submission doesn’t fit what they’re trying to publish, you’re actually wasting the editor’s time, and they don’t like that one bit. It’s not a matter of being the cranky old editor. Some of the more popular magazines get hundreds, if not thousands of submissions every month. They have to reply to each of them–usually with a form rejection. Can you imagine going through a few hundred manuscripts every month?
  • Don’t be an ass. If the editor rejects your manuscript, don’t do any of the following:
    • Write back explaining why your manuscript wasn’t up to par.
    • Write back arguing with the editor over their choice to reject you.
    • Write back with some sort of snarky remark, such as “I guess your magazine doesn’t publish highly metaphorical literary fiction.”
    • Flame the editor for rejecting you on your blog. If you want to be taken seriously, act professional. Unless an editor has done something morally objectionable, leave it be.
    • Send the editor a mean letter.

Hopefully that all makes sense. The biggest thing is to read the guidelines. Seriously.

Email
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Digg
Reddit
LinkedIn

Leave a Reply

Follow Me

Newsletter

Support Me

Recent Posts

A Reading List of Dystopian Fiction and Relevant Texts (Apropos of Nothing in Particular)

Why would someone make a list of important and interesting works of dystopian fiction? Or a suggested reading list of works that are relevant to those dystopian works? There is absolutely no reason other than raw interest. There’s nothing going on to compel this. There is nothing in particular one making such a list would hope you’d learn. The lists below are not an exhaustive list. There are bound to be texts I have forgotten or texts you think folks should read that are not listed. Feel free to make your own list and tell me about it OR leave a comment. I’ll add things I’ve missed! Anywhoodles. Here goes:

Read More »

Duke’s Best EDM Tracks of 2024

And so it came to pass that I finished up my annual Best of EDM [Insert Year Here] lists. I used to do these on Spotify before switching to Tidal, and I continued doing them on Tidal because I listen to an absurd amount of EDM and like keeping track of the tunes I love the most. Below, you will find a Tidal playlist that should be public. You can listen to the first 50 tracks right here, but the full playlist is available on Tidal proper (which has a free version just like Spotify does). For whatever reason, the embedded playlist breaks the page, and so I’ve opted to link to it here and at the bottom of this post. Embeds are weird. Or you can pull songs into your preferred listening app. It’s up to you. Some caveats before we begin:

Read More »

2025: The Year of Something

We’re nine days into 2025, and it’s already full of exhausting levels of controversy before we’ve even had a turnover in power in my home country of the United States. We’ve seen resignations of world leaders, wars continuing and getting worse and worse (you know where), the owner of Twitter continuing his tirade of lunacy and demonstrating why the billionaire class is not to be revered, California ablaze with a horrendous and large wildfire, right wing thinktanks developing plans to out and attack Wikipedia editors as any fascist-friendly organization would do, Meta rolling out and rolling back GenAI profiles on its platforms, and, just yesterday, the same Meta announcing sweeping changes to its moderation policies that, in a charitable reading, encourage hate-based harassment and abuse of vulnerable populations, promotion and support for disinformation, and other problems, all of which are so profound that people are talking about a mass exodus from the platform to…somewhere. It’s that last thing that brings me back to the blog today. Since the takeover at Twitter, social networks have been in a state of chaos. Platforms have risen and fallen — or only risen so much — and nothing I would call stability has formed. Years ago, I (and many others far more popular than me) remarked that we’ve ceded the territory of self-owned or small-scale third party spaces for massive third party platforms where we have minimal to no control or say and which can be stripped away in a tech-scale heartbeat. By putting all our ducks into a bin of unstable chaos, we’re also expending our time and energy on something that won’t last, requiring us to expend more time and energy finding alternatives, rebuilding communities, and then repeating the process again. In the present environment, that’s impossible to ignore.1 This is all rather reductive, but this post is not the place to talk about all the ways that social networks have impacted control over our own spaces and narratives. Another time, perhaps. I similarly don’t have space to talk about the fact that some of the platforms we currently have, however functional they may be, have placed many of us in a moral quagmire, as in the case of Meta’s recent moderation changes. Another time… ↩

Read More »