Proposing freelance articles - phone or email?
Blake Evans-Pritchard
I'm looking for some advice about submitting freelance material
(feature pieces, not news items) to newspapers and magazines - in
particular, whether it's better to approach in the first instance by
phone or email.
I am talking mainly here about contacting editors of magazines who I
have not worked for before, and so who don't really know anything
about me.
Sending an email has the advantage of being able to properly introduce
oneself and explain more clearly and in a little more detail what the
idea is about. It also means that you're not phoning editors up at
inappropriate times, when they are particularly busy, and getting a
hurried "no" simply because they want to get rid of you.
On the other hand, emails can be ignored more easily than the
telephone, and one can't be as pushy by email as on the phone. Also,
the phone is two way, so you can more easily discuss the idea with the
editor, and maybe he has some useful suggestions that wouldn't have
come out over email.
My current thinking is that the best way, in the first instant, is to
approach by email with a rough synopsis of the idea. Then if, after a
week or so, I haven't heard anything back, I follow with a quick phone
call.
Does anyone agree with this? Or can someone suggest a better
alternative?
Thanks in advance,
Blake
Kurt Ullman
>Hi there.
>
>I'm looking for some advice about submitting freelance material
>(feature pieces, not news items) to newspapers and magazines - in
>particular, whether it's better to approach in the first instance by
>phone or email.
>
>I am talking mainly here about contacting editors of magazines who I
>have not worked for before, and so who don't really know anything
>about me.
>
that preference. If not, my next cut would be to check the site (if any) for
the publication. If there is an email listing for an appropriate editor, then
I would send e-mail. Normally this would be by name instead of title to my way
of thinking. Also if the masthead in the magazine itself lists e-mail
addresses, then I would go that route unless a preference is known.
If they don't say and they don't have a personal email listing on the site
or the masthead, then I would send snail mail.
--
"Distracting a politician from governing is like distracting a bear from eating your baby."
--PJ O'Rourke
ActiveVerb
establish a connection before sending a specific pitch. I usually say, I am
such-and-such and give my credentials, and say I have a pitch I'd like to send
them. Others may feel differently, but I think this gets a quicker respone and
also it just makes me feel better and more proactive than sending a proposal
into the great dump heap.
With newspapers, I'd always call. That said, I've sold many pieces to
newspapers just sending them in (opinion mostly).
JB
>
> My current thinking is that the best way, in the first instant, is to
> approach by email with a rough synopsis of the idea. Then if, after a
> week or so, I haven't heard anything back, I follow with a quick phone
> call.
>
There's no black and white answer. Let's say you're an established
writer who just needs one more regular gig -- I'd approach editors by
e-mail and ask if they need a contributing editor. Or, let's say you
are a brand new writer who really needs the work and has some great
ideas -- I'd call some editors and introduce yourself, almost make it
an informational, what advice do you have for me will you look at my
work pitch. For newspapers, if you want to cover a sports story, send
the pitch or call -- if you want to write a travel feature, probably
e-mail about whether they even buy stuff like that.
Another idea -- if you are getting some good work in but not that
much, and you want to bring in a lot more high paying work but you're
somewhat particular, then you might send out mass e-mails to editors
saying, do they want to look at ideas. I think, sending pitches is for
people who could really use the work, introducing yourself is for
newbies, and asking about a regular editor gig is for people who
probably already have enough work.
- JB
Richard Hill
I would recommend that in the first instance you study carefully three
consequtive publications that you would like to write for. Analise your own
style, and decide if it fits with their 'house style'. If not, can you
tailor your work to match their style, 'voice', length etc.
If you're in the UK, you should study the 'Writers and Artists Yearbook' and
the 'Writers Handbook' which will list most publications and describe what
form of unsolicited approach the editor prefers. Is should also tell you
payment rates etc.
Hope this helps somewhat,
Richard Hill - Writer & Producer - DannyDog Productions www.dannydog.co.uk
(A member of the Royal Television Society)
(Part-time lecturer in Media - Uxbridge College - West London
www.uxbridge.ac.uk)
Alan Hope
>Dear Blake,
>I would recommend that in the first instance you study carefully three
>consequtive publications that you would like to write for. Analise your own
>style, and decide if it fits with their 'house style'. If not, can you
>tailor your work to match their style, 'voice', length etc.
You have the cart before the horse. Your style *must* be tailored to
suit the publication you're writing for, otherwise you're going
nowhere in this job.
The idea of any freelance writer having a "voice" is one that needs to
be scrubbed from young minds before any further work can be done.
You'll have a voice when your talent and experience has already been
proven, and editors come looking for it specifically. Until then,
you'll have the voice the paying customer wants you to have, or your
writing will languish unprinted, unpaid and unread.
That's the harsh reality. Nobody is interested in your voice. The
people who will be in a position to pay you for work are looking for
three things:
Can you turn in work on time?
Is it what you were asked for?
Does it run to the length arranged, with little or no clean-up or
rewriting needed?
Like it or not, we're not artists, we're artisans. And just as you'd
not think highly of a chair-maker whose models had three legs, all of
them too long and spindly for your dining-table, and delivered months
too late for that important party, so it is with us.
Do the job you were asked to do (and if you're not sure, ask again and
again until you are sure), do it to the length required, and get it in
on time, clean and tidy. The more you keep those instructions at the
forefront of your mind, and such pretentious notions as "authorial
voice" in the darkest recesses, the better you'll do.
>If you're in the UK, you should study the 'Writers and Artists Yearbook' and
>the 'Writers Handbook' which will list most publications and describe what
>form of unsolicited approach the editor prefers. Is should also tell you
>payment rates etc.
I suspect most beginners are in no position to hum and haw over
payment rates. Enough to say that listings in the W&AY do pay
something, with the odd exception.
There's no substitute for studying the publication itself, which you
can do by buying copies, by going to the library or even by calling
them up and asking for a few back numbers, explaining you're a
contributor-in-waiting. There's no harm in trying. See what they
print: that's an infallible guide to what they want, and how they want
it. Then do the same. You'll get on best with a publication by writing
like their writers wrote -- or at least (since much editing may have
intervened) by writing like they'd like you to think their writers
wrote.
The golden rule, not listed above, is this:
Have good ideas. Have good ideas, and present them in the way
described above. That, in a nutshell, is the key to success in
freelance journalism.
>Hope this helps somewhat,
>Richard Hill - Writer & Producer - DannyDog Productions www.dannydog.co.uk
>(A member of the Royal Television Society)
>(Part-time lecturer in Media - Uxbridge College - West London
>www.uxbridge.ac.uk)
Not a freelance journalist, then?
--
AH
Richard Hill
written for over 20 UK leisure and lifestyle magazines read by an estimated
4 million readers. But then I began contributing to television documentaries
and drama. I do lecture, but maybe you missed the words 'Part Time'. And I
must be doing something right as over 50% of my students get their work
published within 5 weeks of starting a 10 week 'part-time' evening course.
I don't dispute anything else you've written. But please put your claws back
in! I didn't ask for any adversorial, arrogant attitudes Alan.
Alan Hope
Oh, get off your high-horse. I was referring to your own .sig, which
as far as I know was put there by you, and not by anyone else.
I don't really care about the content of your CV, but it does make a
difference if the advice you're giving comes from a different
perspective from the one we assume posters to this group share.
Since you say you don't disagree with my actual comments, there's no
problem between us. If you're going to get all uppity over every
wisecrack you come across, however, I'd recommend you investigate some
other activity than Usenet for your leisure time. It's a rough old
world, and I personally consider that a good thing, especially in this
context. If new posters can't take a bit of rough here, what kind of
puddle of piss are they going to turn into when an editor fails to
reply to their queries in good time? Or <gasp> refuses one of their
ideas?
Baptism of fire, mate. I was forged in the crucible of long nights,
hard work and the ever-present possibility they'd take in agency copy
instead of mine. This place is a walk in the park by comparison,
really it is.
--
AH
K
you cut through the pretentious bullshit.
Alan Hope
>Alan, your thoughts througout this thread are dead-on. I like the way
>you cut through the pretentious bullshit.
I just happened to be the one who replied. You'll find very little
pretentious bullshit in thie ng, among the regulars at least. The
crossposters are something else.
Like many others here, I'm a working Joe. I'm not an artist, but I am
something of a craftsman. I get paid for doing the best job I can,but
it's the employer/client who decides what the job should be. A
stonemason on a medieval cathedral had to put a gargoyle up, and pity
help him if his creativity thought the job called for an angel
instead.
Well, I'm like that. When I feel creative, I bash out a short story --
most of which are gargoyles, not angels, I assure you. That's how I
know I'm not an artist.
--
AH