How to be a Freelance Writer Part Two: Putting Yourself Out There

This is Part Two of a five-part guide on freelance writing. Check out the Introduction and find links to other parts here.

Pitching

Pitching is where you get in touch with an editor (these days most pitching is via email, but it can happen in-person, over the phone, and on Twitter) to tell them about your idea.

In order to pitch, you need to find the editor’s contact details. Often, it’s somewhere on the publication’s website. If not, editors sometimes include their email address on their Twitter account. If you still can’t find it, see if you can find any email address of someone working at the same publication. Publications tend to have particular email address structures (like firstname.lastname@publication.com) so if you know the format, you can guess what the editor’s email is. Some publications have special email addresses specifically for pitches like pitches@publication.com, or submissions@publications.com. In general, it’s better to find a real person’s email address in order to avoid the ghastly fate of the slush pile, but some publications will only let you pitch through these generic addresses.

If you’re still struggling to find who to pitch to, you can always use the phone! (it’s surprising how often people are surprised that this is an option). Just tell the person who takes your call that you’re interested in sending a pitch to the publication, and hopefully you’ll get the relevant details of an editor that way.

It’s really difficult to tell you how to write a pitch per se, because different editors have different tastes. There’s also a huge difference between cold pitching and pitching someone you already know. A cold pitch goes something like this:

Dear [Editor’s name — spelt correctly!]

I am a freelance writer based in [where you are]. I wanted to reach out about an idea I had which would be great for [name of the publication you’re pitching to].

[Context for your idea — why this idea right now?] [The idea — remember to go beyond the topic — what is the story?]

[Why you? What expertise/contacts/experiences can you draw on to make it clear that you’re the best person to write this thing?] I’ve previously written about [general topic you’re pitching] for [short list of publications].

[Anything related to logistics. e.g. are you going to interview people? Who? If this article is super time sensitive, will you be able to file the finished piece quickly?]

I have some relevant clips available at the following URLs: [insert hyperlinks of two to three RELEVANT clips][you may want to explain what the clips are and how they’re relevant, but keep it brief and if it’s self-explanatory, don’t bother].

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Kind Regards,

[Your name, spelt correctly!]

This template is not the gospel truth. Obviously adapt, adjust, make it fresh, make it yours.

With clips, you can, of course, attach files if your clips are not available online. The only issue is that sometimes emails from unknown senders with attachments go straight into a junk folder. One workaround is to say something like “I’m happy to provide pdfs of my previous work” and then briefly describe what the clips would be.

If you’re a fan of the publication you’re pitching to, it can be good to mention a recent article you particularly like, or you could talk about what section you think your story would work for, or you could even point out how your article might be similar in tone or scope to something else they’ve run (obviously don’t pitch ideas that they’ve already done, but just show them you’ve thought about why your story would fit in well with their publication). Don’t be too fan-persony though. You want to show the editor that you can keep things succinct and that you have good judgement about what to include and what not to include in a piece of communication.

Here’s a sample pitch of an idea suggested in Part 2, based on the template above. I’ve included some commentary in[square brackets].

I’m a freelance writer based in the UK [if I was pitching to a UK-publication, I’d be more specific about where exactly in the UK I am]. I wanted to reach out about an idea I had which would be great for the “Profiles” section of Human Interest Magazine.

There has been a recent growth in the number of superstorms worldwide, most likely as a result of rising sea levels caused by climate change. Research from Penn State’s Earth System Science Center predicts that storms of a magnitude similar to Superstorm Sandy could hit New York City every five years [the hyperlink to the research here is optional but it’s good — it shows you’ve done some background research and your editor can follow it up if they want]. Many of us have experienced a superstorm. They often result in injuries — even death — and can have catastrophic ramifications for local economies. Yet, as much as superstorms provoke human crisis, few of us think of how these extreme weather events affect other species [this sentence makes it clear that I’ve moved from a topic (superstorms) to a specific take on the topic (their effects on animals). Next, I get even more specific].

Larry Pickle is different from most of us though. He is so concerned about the welfare of pigeons in the superstorm about to hit the south-east of the UK that he has developed a system to house 400 of them in his backyard to prevent their injury.

I would like to profile Larry and his elaborate backyard set-up, attempting to ascertain why he’s so fond of pigeons. I’d use his story to ask broader questions about the human responsibility to care for animals in such a way (particularly given that the prevalence of superstorms has been heightened by anthropogenic climate change).

I have been in touch with Larry and he is happy for the interview to go ahead [if your story relies on a specific person, you probably do want to get their okay before pitching it, otherwise you risk them saying no and it falling through. If, however, your story relies on you interviewing a few people but precisely who you interview is less important (say, you want to speak to a climate scientist, but not any specific climate scientist), then it’s reasonable to not have organised this before pitching]. I have previously profiled people with unusual interests, such as Bert, who believes that collecting bottlecaps is a major if oft overlooked spiritual practice; and Bette, a magician who incorporates bees as fundamental parts of her act. The URLs for these clips are available here: [sadly, I’ve never worked on such stories!]. As you can see from the clips, I have a knack for rendering eccentric practices into stories that can be relevant for all readers.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Editors are busy people. Keep the pitch to the point and just give them reasons to say “yes”. Here are the things that an editor might like about my pitch above (ignoring the fact that it’s not a true story):

• It’s relevant. There’s an upcoming superstorm, so an article about a superstorm ticks that box.
• It’s a surprising and funny take on the superstorm. It passes the test of whether it’s the sort of story people would remember and talk about with friends down at the pub.
• There’s reference to the section of the magazine the idea would be appropriate for, evidence that the writer has read it (you’d be surprised by how many brownie points that’ll get you, even if your pitch ends up being unsuccessful).
• You can’t be sure, but Larry sounds like good talent — you could probably get some interesting quotes from him.
• The interview has already been secured.
• If the clips are good, you can have confidence that the writer would do a good job interviewing him.
• The writer seems to have expertise in reporting on eccentricity (remembering from part one that sometimes writers come to specialise in themes rather than topics)
• The writer has thought about how to get the reader involved in the story (thinking about our responsibility to animals), so it’s not just an odd account of a weird man, it really engages with what he has to say and may make readers question their own views on animal ethics.

It’s hard to know how much research to do before a pitch. As a general rule, I’d say that research is a big part of the job of writing and you should be paid for it, and so, you don’t have to know every aspect of the topic before pitching. You do have to do enough research to be able to show that the topic is relevant (does it affect many people? was it recently in the news?) and that your idea is unique. If you’re going to be interviewing people, you should have some idea of who to direct your questions to and what questions you’d like to ask them.

I would also say that you should only pitch topics that you already have some pre-existing interest in. The hardest pieces I’ve written have really plunged me into areas that I was so ignorant about I didn’t know how ignorant I was. You don’t have to be an expert on a topic to pitch it, but it’s a good rule of thumb to have knowledge or experience to fall back on. Otherwise, you spend all of your time learning rather than writing, and your pay won’t be commensurate with the level of effort you’re putting in. There is a skill in knowing when not to pitch an idea and passing it along to someone else who is better-placed to write it.

When you know an editor, pitching can be quite different. Obviously, you don’t have to introduce yourself. Sometimes you write pitches that are a sentence or two (I’ve heard of people sending one word pitches to editors they really get along with). They’re sometimes quite chatty in tone too, and way less formal.

Some editors don’t mind (or will even prefer) getting multiple pitches at once. As you come to be on friendlier terms (it happens!) you may find it’s appropriate to send off a few ideas at once. I also tend to send multiple pitches at once when pitching to brand new publications. If I can’t read it yet, then I can’t get a good feel for what they do, and so I think it makes sense to pitch two or three different ideas to understand what they’re looking for.

Submitting

It tends to be preferable to pitch a piece, because a pitch acceptance means that an editor is prepared to accept your work, pay for it (if it’s a paying publication), and it means that you’re on the same page with the idea. For example, you know that the publication doesn’t have something similar in the pipeline, you know that the idea appeals to them, and the editor can give you feedback on the idea if they want you to re-focus your piece. However, there’s a few different reasons why you might not want to pitch a piece:

· You don’t know where the piece is going yet, and you won’t know until you write it. You don’t feel confident explaining what you’re doing until you’ve really “found” the piece.

· You want to write the piece regardless of whether it ever gets published (perhaps because the piece is really important to you, or perhaps because you’re a baby writer and want more experience in writing full pieces).

· It’s for a market that doesn’t really accept pitches (literary magazines rarely take pitches, and some editors don’t like to commission op-eds and personal essays without seeing how the writer tackles the piece).

It’s fine if you want to work on submitting over pitching, but do note that some publications will not take submissions — they will only publish the piece if you pitched it first and they accepted your pitch.

If you’re submitting to a literary magazine or any other publication that predominantly accepts submissions, they’ll have specific submission guidelines on their website that you must follow. If the publication you want to submit to has no such details and guidelines, you’ll have to track down relevant contact details (see the “Pitching” section above) and write the relevant editor an email. In your email, you can go into less detail about your piece than you would in a pitch, but it is still a good idea to summarise what the piece is about, and why you’re a good person to write it. Include a short bio. Don’t worry about clips. It’s better to send a submission as an attachment, but if it seems like the editor never received your submission, you can copy and paste the text into an email (lots of people hate this, so use it as a last resort).

Dealing with rejection

I can promise that you’ll be rejected a lot. If you don’t experience rejection, it’s likely a sign that you aren’t challenging yourself enough. To deal with rejection you have to know this:

IT IS NOT A REFLECTION ON YOU

It’s not a reflection on you. It is not a reflection on you. It’s not a reflection on your writing. It may not even be a reflection on your idea. Here are some reasons why your pitch/submission may be rejected:

· The publication ran something similar, or is about to.

· There’s no budget for your story.

· The idea is not quite right for the publication you pitched.

· The piece is too short or long.

· The publication doesn’t work with freelancers.

· You pitched something technical and the publication only wants researchers in the field to write about technical stuff.

· The editor isn’t interested in that topic.

· It’s a good idea but it’s hard to see how it will be visually exciting for readers.

· The idea is too ambitious.

· The editor isn’t convinced your idea is different enough from what already exists.

· The editor never saw your email (it went to junk, got deleted, etc.)

· They get dozens of submissions every day and they can only publish the best three, and yours was the fourth best.

· The editor isn’t convinced the story will get lots of shares.

My point is that there’s lots of reasons why stories get rejected which don’t have a direct relationship to you, your writing, or even the quality of your idea. Unless an editor has offered direct feedback, don’t assume that their rejection has anything to do with you.

When you get rejected as a matter of course, you come to realise that there are actually different types of rejection:

· Silence. This is a very frustrating type. You sent your idea and you’ve been patiently waiting for a response. You’ve sent a follow-up email (if you haven’t heard back on a pitch and it’s been a week or two, sending a follow-up is a good idea), and another, and a third. Nothing. This kind of rejection sucks because you don’t know what you did wrong (if anything) or even if the editor saw it.

· Mean rejection. These are very unusual, but I note that even very accomplished writers have faced them from time to time, so think of it as a badge of writerdom. I got a mean rejection when I was starting out: an editor told me my idea was good but didn’t like my clips. Ouch! To make matters worse, instead of saying “your writing”, she said “you’re writing”. Rejected by someone who doesn’t know how to use apostrophes! Double ouch!

· Feedback rejection. These may be a little dispiriting, but pay attention to them because they’re rife with practical information. The editor might, for example, say that the publication isn’t accepting pitches right now, and to pitch again in a few weeks. They might say that the section that your pitch is for only commissions writers they know, so now you know it’s a waste of time to pitch that section. They may include pitching guidelines, which is awesome because now you know how the editor likes pitches to be structured. They may also tell you why your particular pitch didn’t work for them (e.g. feedback like, “you have to convince me that this is an important issue”). Getting specific feedback like that is really rare, so you should see it as an endorsement of your talent. They wouldn’t tell you how to improve if they weren’t interested in hearing from you again!

· Kind rejection. “This idea won’t work for us right now because [reason], but I’d love to work with you in the future. Let me know if you have any other ideas.” Kind rejections are really just pre-acceptances. These are the best. As well, it’s a very talented editor who can say no to you and still make you feel special, so if you can, it’s a good idea to take them up on that offer.

Another important thing to know when dealing with rejection is that editors (being busy people) are not keen to create unnecessary work for themselves. Editors have no reason to invite you to pitch again if they don’t want you to. So, if they say something nice, just take their word for it. I know it’s hard, but rejection can be a very constructive — even positive — experience. I’m not saying you should learn to love it, but there’s a lot of scope to incorporate rejection as part of your career. Writer, Kim Liao even suggests that we should aim to get 100 rejections a year.

Dealing with questions about your pitch

If an editor has some questions for you about your pitch, this is a good sign. They’re finding the idea promising enough to use up some of their limited time to flex their curiosity and find some aspect or angle of the idea that will fit with the publication. They also must believe in you as a writer — if you wrote dreadfully and they didn’t want to work with you, they wouldn’t be asking questions. Asking questions doesn’t mean they’ll accept your pitch. In my experience though, the odds are in your favour, although depending on the questions you might end up writing something quite different to what you pitched.

If the editor is asking you questions, here are some pieces of advice I’d have:

· Answer the questions in a timely way — they shouldn’t wait for longer than a day unless there’s a reason why you need to take longer (and if that’s the case, let them know with an email saying something like, “this is a very good question. I’d have to check with my source, I’ll get back to you with the answer by Wednesday”)

· If you don’t know the answer, find it. It’s worth doing some research at this stage because it could easily make the difference between getting a commission and not.

· If the answer doesn’t exist (sometimes editors do ask unanswerable questions), you can say so politely, and suggest an alternative piece of relevant information (e.g. “good question, unfortunately there aren’t any statistics I can find on that, but in my source’s anecdotal experience at their clinic, it affects about 20% of young people they see.”)

Acceptance!

Yay! Getting a pitch accepted is a huge achievement and this is cause for celebration (even if the only celebration you have time for is a few spins on your swivel chair). You should email the editor back and tell them thank-you and that you’ll get started asap.

If you don’t know how much the publication is going to pay you, how many words you’re supposed to write, and/or when the deadline for your piece is, now is definitely the time to ask. Especially about the pay thing. Discussions about money are always, always super awkward, but not bringing it up is worse. Eventually, you will have to ask, and if it’s after you file the story (that is, after you’ve sent the completed piece to your editor), they might say something like, “I assumed you were writing for free because we didn’t talk about pay rates” (this is something I know from experience — although I was actually paid in the end AND I never made the mistake again of avoiding pay rates).

You may or may not have a contract to sign. If you do, read it. Before you sign, here are some things you want to pay attention to:

· Are all the details (your name, the deadline, the pay rate, the brief if there is one) correct?

· Does it stipulate a kill fee? (this is what you’d be paid if the editor decides not to publish your piece after you’ve written it — more on that in the next part)

· Do you retain copyright? (depending on the piece, this might not seem like a big deal, but it’s important that you do retain copyright for the piece in case there’s occasion to use it again for a different publication, and also because it’s helpful for all freelance writers if we all do our bit to protect our intellectual property)

· Is there anything you don’t understand? (as a writer, your literacy skills are probably excellent so if you don’t understand something, don’t be embarrassed to ask. You can also get someone else to read over items. Sometimes contracts are written in incomprehensible jargon, but incomprehensibility can also be a red flag)

If you don’t have a contract, the emails sent between you and the editor become the contract. This means that if there were any verbal aspects to your agreement, you probably want to put them in writing and send them to the editor for them to approve. An email like, “Just to make sure we’re on the same page and it’s all written down, we agreed on the phone that I’d speak to three sources for the piece” is good. Then the editor can’t turn around and say, “I asked for four sources!” (they probably wouldn’t, but it’s a good habit to protect yourself).

For the US market, I’d be a little nervous if I didn’t get a contract. It’s not because emails aren’t legally binding, it’s just because contracts are part of standard practice more in that market than others. If you feel comfortable without a contract, that’s cool, but if something seems a bit dodgy then it might be, and asking for a contact may be a way to address some of your concerns.

You may be asked to write on spec. Writing on spec means that if you write the piece and the editor likes it and you’ll be published and paid and everything’s fine; but if the editor doesn’t like it then they aren’t obligated to pay you.

Writing on spec is a controversial issue in freelance writing. I can’t tell you what to do if you’re in this situation, but I can tell you what I think. One of the problems with writing on spec is that there’s no financial incentive for the editor to work with you on the piece to make it publishable, and so writing on spec may itself decrease your odds of getting published. If you already have a few great clips, an editor should be able to see what you do and invest in your talent — even if it’s a slight risk to them. If you don’t have relevant clips — if you’re pitching without previous experience, or if, say, you want to write a feature article but you’ve only ever written music reviews before — then I think it’s reasonable for the editor to ask you to write on spec. However, that doesn’t mean you have to take them up on their offer.

When considering whether you should write on spec it’s also worth looking at the publication. A non-for-profit might not be able to afford content it can’t run. What’s reasonable or unreasonable really depends on the context.

The editor may adapt your pitch to incorporate a different angle, or get you to interview different people, or otherwise change around your idea. For example, I once pitched a piece about existential risk in relation to travel and terrorism. I had all these ideas about interviewing security experts and so on, but because I had experience of actually being near terrorist events when they occurred, my editor told me to hone in on that personal viewpoint and not actually phone up experts. As is often the case, it was a better piece because the editor rejiggered my focus. That said, if you don’t understand or like their suggestions, it’s okay to ask questions, to explain why you want to do it the way you want to do it, and perhaps come to some other agreement. It’s really important that it’s possible for you to write the piece you’ve been asked to write (otherwise it’ll get killed) and that the end result will be something you believe in.

An acceptance is success but it’s an ambiguous success because often you still have to do the daunting task of writing. Different people deal with acceptance differently and it’s worth thinking about how it might impact you. Here are some possibilities:

· Delight! This is good, use your energy to get started.

· Distraction. The first few times I was commissioned I was so chuffed I couldn’t really concentrate on anything. The good/bad news is that this feeling fades fast.

· Shock. Sometimes your pitching for so long and hearing back nothing that you stop imagining what actually working on the piece will actually be like. Getting an acceptance, while good, can feel shocking, you start asking yourself, “now what do I do?” If so, take a few breaths, put it aside for a while, and then start planning how you’re going to write the piece. Breaking it down into manageable chunks is a good strategy.

· Despair. Imposter syndrome is real. You might start thinking thoughts like, “I can’t do this” or “I don’t deserve this success”. It sucks but you have to just work through it. The truth is that the editor must believe in you, otherwise they wouldn’t have given you the assignment. It’s not easy to convince an editor to give you an assignment, especially if you pitched them cold. They’ve seen something in you that’s impressive. Again, breaking the work down into tasks you know you can do can be a really helpful way of getting started.

Writing for free, writing for pay

In general, I’d encourage writers to get paid for their writing as soon as they’re first looking to publish. When you’re looking to be paid as a writer, these are the attributes that are the most valuable (in order):

· Do you have a good story to tell? (Are you pitching a good, unique idea that’s executable?)

· Can you write? (Your pitch itself demonstrates this, but having a few good clips in there is even better)

· Do you have relevant experience? (If you’ve been published in something that’s not your blog, that’ll help your case, but not 100% necessary)

· Do you have relevant qualifications? (Nobody ever even asks you if you have these because they don’t care. There are some exceptions though, like if you have a science degree and want to do some science writing that’ll probably work in your favour).

If you have all of these things, you don’t need to write for free (of course you can still write for free if you want). If you have one or two of these things then possibly writing for free is a good option for you to gain clips and experience. However, if the two things you have are the top two, I’d advise to at least try to pitch paying markets before writing for free. In general, try the paying markets before writing for free.

If you’re writing for free, I’d encourage you to think carefully about who you’re writing for. Here are some considerations I’d advise:

· If they don’t offer pay, do they at least offer editorial support? One of the biggest problems with writing for publications that don’t pay is that editors are usually so hands-off that you don’t get the feedback you need to improve (my experience is that the more a publication pays, the more edits you have to do, and therefore the more you improve as a writer). Try to write for a publication that’s invested in your talent somehow, even if they can’t pay you human money. Often student newspapers are good for professional development.

· Is someone profiting from your writing? This is the problem I have with the Huffington Post — it’s a huge media company which makes heaps of profits because their business model is not to pay the very freelance writers that enable them to make so much money. Write for publications that will value you, even if they can’t pay you — non-profits and zines are great options.

· Can they give you free stuff? I do the occasional theatre review for my local street press because I get to see otherwise expensive plays for free. It’s worth it in my opinion because I can write a solid, short review in 45 minutes and it tends to be a good night out despite my looming deadline and despite the fact that I have to scrawl notes in the dark.

· Do they treat writers nicely? Don’t write for free for people who aren’t grateful for it, or who aren’t kind to you.