Freelancing FAQ

so
(a) my book is out in the world (see relevant threads), and
(b) my editing and subbing backstop work is becoming more and more competitive and less and less print-based (where all my experience is) and generally further and fewer between so
(c) i am putting myself back out in the world for freelance writing yay gritted.teeth.emoji

and i very belatedly have a query = how acceptable (or sensible) is it to send the exact same idea to several outlets at the same time?

to date i have always tended to operate a kind of "first refusal"/"second refusal" system, which is respectful to commissioning editors but maybe not helpful to me?

except: if outlet x (that i really really want to work with) is slow in saying yes but does say yes, and outlet y (who would be nice to work with but not quite ideal in this instance) says yes quicker, how do i extract it from y to give to x without looking like a flake or a chancer (or is all fair in love and pitching?)

Short answer: Yes, all is fair in love and pitching, ultimately.

Less short answer: Being on both sides - I commission interviews/stories for an outlet, my main job, but do freelancing on the side - I'd say go by them one at a time. It will take more time for you to get an answer, but as an editor I don't like to say yes to something only to be told you've sold it to someone who was quicker.

Also, I'm guessing you're not mass-emailing ideas to loads of publications, and will usually tailor your story so that it's perfect for two or maybe three outlets, right? In which case it's not that big a bother to do it one by one imo.

Is it the time waiting for an answer before you can move on to the next publication (after a 'no') that prompted this?

yes and the frustration of missing things bcz outlet x takes a while to get back (where "a while" can be extremely variable)

i guess there's a judgment here about what "quicker" is? if i wait until a potential new outlet gives me a definitive no i may be waiting forever -- and some projects are much more time-tied than others. i've missed things before because my first choice outlet was (in my opinion) more sluggish than they should have been.

i guess based on my own reply etiquette i'd say a fortnight is long enough to assume a monthly is not going to reply (yr project is lost in their unread email sludge) but is a week me being too impatient?

Oh, a week to ten days really is the max, that's not you being impatient imo. Assuming you know yr shit (you do) and sent it to the right person etc. It's a tricky thing to figure out though, no doubt, and I don't think there's a golden rule of thumb.

Thinking about it now, and this sounds very un-2020 but, an approach that usually gets me a result (= a commission) is to speak to someone on the phone first, run my idea by them, and then agree to send a detailed rundown of the idea via email. This way you'll get to wind them around your finger and unleash your massive charm, and also get an idea if they'll bite or not. But you have to feel comfortable doing that (and sort of know if the other party does not hate phone calls, in which case, don't call them lol).

Another good trick is to figure out as best you can what their production cycle is and pitch as soon as they've sent an issue to press, when they can absolutely devote time and attention to your pitch (as opposed to mid-cycle, when everyone's frantic and non-essential emails are deleted unread en masse).

lol i am highly phonephobic LBI and wd certainly anxiously chatter any coldcall target into rejecting an idea that i can probably woo them with on (e)paper

unperson, yes absolutely, good tactic

an unexpectedly pleasing aspect of this moment is that many of my peers are retiring and commissioning editors are from a successor generation: i get less "ffs this weirdo again, tell him no" and more "omg the legendary (if weird) mark s, tell him no" haha