Submission Guidelines...Take 'em or Leave 'em?

I've written before about the rules an aspiring writer can ignore and the ones he can't. Some of the ones that can't be ignored may seem pretty silly (in fact, they may be pretty silly), but at the end of the day it doesn't matter. If your excellent article is never published because the editor didn't like your paperclip, perhaps the editor was unreasonable..but that knowledge won't get you a paycheck or a clip. In the simplest possible terms, it would be pretty damned stupid for you to miss out on a paying writing gig because you couldn't be bothered to read the guidelines and find out that the editor preferred that pages be folded in half (or in thirds, or not be folded).

There are always those writer-hopefuls who say indignantly, "Well, if an editor is going to throw out a submission just because it's stapled, I don't want to work with her anyway!"

Really?

You'd rather remain unpublished? Well, okay then.

But for those who want to make a living writing and are willing to invest a little effort to get there, paying attention to guidelines is important. No, not every editor will toss a submission because of a minor technical violation, but you don't know which will.

I've been giving this a lot of thought recently because about a month ago, I posted an ad on Craig's List seeking submissions for my webzine. The posting brought a flood of traffic to the site, but only a fraction of that traffic made it to the submission guidelines page. The ad also brought a flood of inquiries. Maybe, given the fact that so few of the visitors from Craig's List had made it to the submissions page, it shouldn't be a surprise that the guidelines posted on that page were roundly ignored.

I received submissions approximately half the length of the pieces we publish. I received satirical pieces, though we don't publish satire. Perhaps most perplexing, I received dozens of emails and resumes with no information whatsoever beyond publishing history...although the very brief ad text said directly "we don't care about your publishing history or your credentials".

I did, I must admit, dismiss those inquiries fairly quickly. When (several times) I came across a blank email with nothing but a resume attached, I didn't even open it. I even got a little annoyed. But what really jumped out at me were the submissions--and even just email inquiries--that clearly indicated that the author had been to the site, read the guidelines, looked around at our other articles, and then attempted to submit a piece or make a pitch that FIT OUR SITE. Those submissions, because they were so few and far between, made an impression on me. Enough of an impression that if for some reason a piece didn't fit, I responded personally, explaining why and inviting the author to edit and resubmit or to submit another article.

In a nutshell, all those sloppy writers mass-submitting without reading guidelines, tailoring their pitches, or removing their paperclips are creating an excellent opportunity for the rest of you. You can make your submission stand out just by doing what you're told. Of course, the quality of your work will have to stand up to a closer look, but getting the closer look is easier for the conscientious among you when the careless so outnumber you. Make the most of that edge.

Associated Content - It Isn't the Only Option

Every once in a while, I see an "advice" post encouraging bloggers to submit articles to Associated Content or an article bank. Associated Content makes some payment for the articles, though it's very small and largely dependent on traffic; most article banks do not.

Now, before I go on, let me just say that there are sometimes good reasons to use outlets like GoArticles or Associated Content--as I've clearly spelled out before, I'm in favor of the dreaded "writing for free" when there's a clear benefit to the writer. You're not going to hear the old arguments from me like, "They make a lot more money than they're paying you!" This isn't a word I use often, but let me say it clearly now: DUH! Magazines make a lot more money than they pay for articles and restaurants make a lot more money than they pay their cooks and if the didn't, they wouldn't be in business.

There are two big issues, though, that bother me every time I see someone in a forum or on a money-making blog or in any of a dozen other places encourage readers to "submit" to Associated Content or article banks. The first is that Associated Content seems to be set up as something to aspire to: if you're a good writer and you have knowledge on a topic (etc., etc.) you should submit to Associated Content!

Maybe it's just me, but I think that if you're a good writer and you have good knowledge to impart and you want to take that beyond your own blog, you should be submitting to established markets that will simply cut you a check when they accept your article and won't expect you to do your own promotion.

I recently posted about a quick sale I made after discovering a new online magazine. As I mentioned then, it wasn't a high dollar sale by any stretch of the imagination. Still, it would have taken tens of thousands of views to achieve the same income from an Associated Content article, and I wouldn't have come away with a published clip for my portfolio.

There have always been far too many reasons (read: rationalizations) for writers not to submit their work, and the Associated Content compromise looks like just one more. If you write well and you know what you're talking about but you're not a "real writer", here's a great option for you! Nonsense. If you write well and you know what you're talking about, you're a real writer.

Again, that doesn't mean there's no good reason to use Associated Content or article banks--there are some good reasons, provided you have clear goals and know how to use them effectively. But if you're producing good content for your blog and want to "get published" in other forums, there are many other options. If you're not so sure, just Google a phrase like "online magazine writers guidelines". That one (without the quotes) returns more than 1.8 million results--and many of them are direct links to submission guidelines for paying publications you probably don't even know exist.

If you are going to submit to Associated Content or a similar outlet, make sure that you have a clear vision. That vision should include not only your goals for placing that content, but your plan for achieving them. Understand that simply submitting an article to Associated Content or an article bank is very unlikely to drive significant traffic to your blog or to generate significant income for you. Your article will be competing with thousands of others, likely many others on the same topic. No one is going to market it for you--if you want it to pay off (in links or cash), you must be prepared to promote it yourself. You can do that, and do it very effectively if you do your homework and plan ahead, but don't think that simply submitting an article to Associated Content or an article bank is going to magically produce results for you. Whatever marketing approach you choose, someone has to do the legwork...and with outlets like these, that someone is you.