5 Reasons I Reject Stories. Don’t Do These To Any Editor, Okay?

Buckle up, we’re getting real about a-holes in the submission process.

Ever heard of Am I The A — hole? It’s a Reddit community where people post stuff that happened to them and readers decide who’s the a — hole. lol. Sometimes, everyone is the a — hole. But most of the stories are just a bunch of people who desperately want random strangers to tell them *they* were right.

We humans sure love being right. Writers aren’t much different.

If you hang out at FB writers’ groups or anywhere writers congregate, you’ll discover a lot of writers who think editors are a bunch of a — holes. Because they got rejected, of course.

— Stupid editor. Yah, they’re way too picky over there. — I’m with you, bro. Totally the editors suck at that one. — Yeah, that pub can (insert profanity of choice) — Yah, I won’t even submit to them. F — them.

When I see stuff like that, I have to shake my head. I get it. Rejection sucks. I’ve been rejected too.

Buckle up because we’re about to get real about why writers get rejected and who is really the a — hole in the submission and rejection game.

Last June I wrote about a weird experience and THIS is what no one told you about publications.

Read this part slow, okay? It’s real important. I wrote about this last June and it’s something no one really tells writers. It started when I had a strange experience with two different publications, one big and one small.

— Post #1: Published to: 121K readers. Result: 569 views — Post #2: Published to: 237 readers. Result: 9500 views

What the…?

How is that even possible? How do you publish to 237 readers and get 9.5K views? Easy. It’s the secret of the whole internet.

Results beget results.

It works everywhere. If people buy your book on Amazon, they show it to more people. If no one buys it, they bury it. If your page converts, Google sends more traffic. If they bounce, they drop your ranking. If people interact with your FB post, you get more views. No interaction, no more views.

It works the same way for writers.

When you publish a story, if people read and engage with it, you get more distribution. The more they click and read, the more distribution they get. Algorithms favor results.

I will say that again. Algorithms favor results.

The small publication (mine) is highly targeted with a responsive readership. They responded — and distribution to a wider audience quickly followed.

Now, take the flip side of that, okay? If people do not engage with your writing time after time, you teach the algorithm something.

Not just about you. About the publication, too.

5 reasons I reject stories, but it’s not just me. Don’t do these to any editor, okay?

Here are the most common reasons *I* reject submissions. I’m hoping other editors will add their experiences to mine.

#1. You ignored the voice/tone of the publication

Some writer wrote about her “publication challenge” — she’s going to submit to 30 publications in 30 days. Know what I was thinking?

“Not me, please. Keep me out of your pub crawl.”

There’s nothing wrong with submitting to a lot of publications… as long as you take the time to get to know what each one is looking for. Pub crawl people seldom do. Publications become notches on the bedpost, so to speak. Conquests. There you go, publication #25 down— 5 left to go.

*sigh*

Writers not knowing the publication is a problem everywhere. That’s why magazines have boilerplate rejection letters. Many sites that pay writers stopped seeking new writers because of people blindly submitting crap without reading the submission guidelines. Don’t be that writer.

In my publication, I’m looking for storytelling. Sound like Wikipedia, and I’ll ask for a rewrite. I let a few slip through and regretted it. They never do well. My audience wants story. Simple as that.

Know what happens when the fit is bad? The writer thinks the publication sucks and the publication thinks the writer sucks. Neither of those matter. What matters is whether the readers enjoy it. Usually, that’s a no.

When submitting to any publication, you should know what they’re looking for. If you don’t, that’s on you.

How to fix that: Just scroll through their “latest stories” page and see what got great response. Just add /latest to the publication url.

#2. You don’t follow the distribution guide

I should not have to say this, but there are still people who have no clue that guidelines for distribution exist. They do. If you don’t follow them, your story won’t get distribution. As a writer, you should know them.

Now let me ask you a question. If your story would not qualify for distribution, why would any editor want it in their publication? Editors want you to get distributed. When writers get more distribution, so does the publication.

How to fix that: Click this link and read the guidelines. In particular, watch to see which you’re most likely to make. The most common is referring to “facts” without citing the source, but there’s a handful that I see way too often.

#3. The story idea is good, but the writing isn’t quite there yet.

Can I tell you something I noticed? Most writers have really good story ideas. They really do. But sometimes, the reading isn’t easy. Know what I mean? It’s a little stilted or maybe a bit too rambling. Or it starts too slow.

The biggest one in my publication is when writers try to cram a biography into an 8 minute read and it ends up sounding like Wikipedia. How could it not? I mean, if you tried to tell your own life story in 8 minutes, it would sound that way, too. Better to focus on a “story” within a life.

Another common problem is a slow start. A lot of writers could slash the first paragraph and it would open much stronger. I see that in other publications, too. It’s really important to capture interest as fast as possible. You can read more about how to open strong in this piece. It’s old but good. Also short.

Here’s the thing. You can be married to the story you’re trying to tell, or you can be married to the words you used. But you can’t be married to both.

How to fix that: Honestly? Read it out loud. The places you stumble are the same places readers will stumble. Also — ask yourself, if you were telling this story to a group of people around a campfire, is this how you’d tell it?

#4. You’re not receptive to suggestion

True story. A writer submitted a piece to my publication. I told him I’d like to see a different title. The one he used was a tv reference that my readers probably wouldn’t get. I knew it would not fly and I wanted him to get clicked and read. Know what he did? He changed it!! Omg. lol. O.M.G.

Do you have any idea how rare that is?

So many writers get so, so mad and terribly offended if you suggest they change anything. Even the title, for heaven’s sakes. No editor wants to deal with “that” writer who will bite their head off if they suggest edits.

I’m not saying editors are God and you should blindly do everything they say. Not at all. There is room for discussion. But keep in mind editors know their publication and audience better than you. They see publication stats, so they know what gets clicked and read.

Often the best editors won’t bother to suggest changes.

Once burned, twice shy. They’ve had their heads bitten off for suggesting changes once too often. No one is paying them. So even if they could help make the piece strong, they won’t suggest anything. They’ll accept as is, or reject it. That sucks for both the writer and the publication.

How to fix that: Here’s a radical idea. When you submit a story, leave a note for the editors and tell them if they have suggestions to make it stronger or a better fit for the publication, you’re open to feedback. Even if they don’t suggest any changes, think of it as brownie points earned. lol.

#5. I can’t reach you

Another true story. A writer submitted a story that had a good story behind it. I thought it had real potential. But it stumbled in a few places. And the title was one word and not even an interesting word. lol.

No one is going to click an article called “Mary” or “horse” It’s a story, not a book.

So I did what editors do. Highlighted a word so I could leave a message. But no. I couldn’t. Because the ability to leave a message disappears when the writer has notifications turned off.

I even went to her profile to try find some way to contact her. Nope. Nothing. No way to contact.

Maybe she had a legit reason to turn off notifications. Maybe someone is harassing her. Maybe someone did in the past. But she could have put some way to reach her into the draft. Darn shame, that story had potential.

How to fix that: If you’re submitting to publications, make sure editors have a way to contact you. Either turn notifications on, or put contact info in the draft and ask the editor to delete it before publishing.

In closing: Editors aren’t sadists. Quite the opposite. They actually just want you to do well.

First time I got rejected, it was a print magazine, years ago. The editor was kind enough to tell me what was wrong and how to correct it. I made the revisions. I got accepted. I got paid. That simple.

Except it’s not simple. Facing criticism never is. It requires setting aside our big fat ego. No offence. We all have ego.

First time I got rejected here, the editor told me my story was a little thin. They want more meat on the bone. Ouch. That stung. But after my ego recovered, I agreed. It was a bit thin. I rewrote it.

Here’s the thing. Editors screw up, too. We’re human. We can all find stories of the time an editor rejected a story and it went viral somewhere else. Those are exceptions. Exceptions don’t change the rule.

For the most part, editors just want to publish content their readers will like. They’re not sadists. They don’t get their kicks inflicting pain and ridicule on writers who just want an audience for their writing.

Even in the worst case scenario, if the editor is wrong? The right response is never slamming them in a public space. Best that gets is “everyone sucks.”

Like? Read my posts about writing here, or my newest posts here. Or, check out my lists, because I write about all sorts of weird stuff.