Publications, Red Lights and Conflicts of Interest

This week, I began to see a possible conflict with some publications being paid to seek out stories worthy of the boost.

Some publication editors, called curators, are paid a certain amount to nominate stories for boosting. And their boosting powers don’t have to be kept secret, curators can advertise them to the writers of their publications.

In my opinion, being rewarded is fair enough, as the editors are having to spend time reading and selecting the crème of the crop. However, as their main selection is taken from the stories they edited earlier, I wonder if they may already have a fair idea of which ones to pick?

Yet still, I think receiving a monetary contribution is OK. In fact, I truly believe that anyone who is running a publication on Medium, which has met a certain predetermined standard — perhaps an amount of followers or views per month — should receive some kind of reward.

Running a magazine is work. And for most of us, unpaid.

Recently, I began to see a possible conflict with some publications being paid to seek out stories worthy of the boost.

Let me tell you about it…

I’ve been writing some tales that I would class as general fiction. And so began searching for a magazine I would be happy publishing them with.

I am very lucky to have over 300 email subscribers, which means when ever I post a story, lots of people receive a notification in their inbox with a direct link to my tale. Because of this, I don’t feel the need to use the amount of followers a magazine has as part of my selection criteria. Indeed, I prefer those with simply an inclusive, community feel.

However, if you do not have many subscribers, I would suggest publishing with a popular magazine. Your stories will be distributed to the publication followers, and this will help your own subscriber list to grow.

I settled on Pure Fiction who already have many excellent writers including Gentry Bronson and Debdutta Pal. Plus very relatable editors KL Simmons and JA Vassili. I was impressed with their straightforward guidelines and felt buoyed by their words:

We hunger for your creativity and celebrate your unique voice.

I also liked:

It’s not mandatory but we do appreciate it when our writers follow Pure Fiction.

On my own publication Tantalizing Tales, I ask new writers to follow & subscribe to the magazine, and to Posy Churchgate & myself. As a way of thanking us for the time we spend proofing and promoting their work.

So ‘Pure Fiction’ easily won my vote for their humble approach, and I have already published a couple of stories with them and will be sending in my third very soon.

But while searching the Medium platform for magazines, I came accross a set of publication guidelines which to be honest made me feel a little uncomfortable by the time I had finished reading.

Certain things were familiar, such as sending in a couple of drafts to see if you fit their brand. Great. But they also wanted:

• the medium profile to include a good quality picture of the writer.

I wondered if the one below would work for me? :-)

• Furthermore, the editor must have a lot of time on their hands, as they mentioned they would delve into your profile and check out who you wrote for and which writers you followed.

Now, I am not saying any of the above is bad protocol. It seems a little over the top to me, but I do understand how a publication can become your pride and joy, so you want the writers to be committed. Although, checking a writer’s Medium movements did make me feel a little creeped out. I could hear Sting singing — Every Breath You Take.

However, I pushed on — not yet defeated, until I got to a section which said something like…

• supporting the magazine on a coffee monetary app would be appreciated, but not mandatory.

As I said earlier, I do understand that editors are doing a job and time is money for most people. So yes, why not ask for a tip?

• But then, a little later it advises, when sending in your drafts for review you should also state which level of payment you would be willing to support on the coffee app.

You know, even though the guidelines made me cringe a little I still felt… OK-ish with it all, right down to the probability that the ‘not mandatory support’ most likely meant — you won’t be added as a writer unless you contribute.

And, I would rather an editor be somewhat upfront like this, than ask behind the scenes.

Yes. I was willing to turn the page knowing it was the editor’s personal choice to have these stringent requirements, and at the end of the day a writer can walk away if they don’t like the sound of it. Which I was about to do without another thought… but then I saw this editor was part of the boosting program.

No… I was still going to walk away, but NOW I had a definite niggle I needed to process:

• The magazine also stated a writer would stand a better chance of being boosted by publishing with them…

I closed the tab and went for a walk.

It wasn’t until later when I sat by the sea, listening to the seagulls drowning out the noise of the crows, that I realised what the problem was:

An editor, who actively encourages authors to send in money in order to be part of their publication, has been chosen by Medium to select writer’s stories to be boosted on the platform.

Red light goes on!

Call me cynical, but this seems like a recipe for disaster. Venal… Something that could easily be open to corruption.

Or am I just thinking too deeply again?