The making of a magazine

(third in a series)

Every now and then, I receive an e-mail or letter from a potential contributor who wants his or her article to appear in WildBird and goes about it in the completely wrong way. Here’s the third wrong way: suggesting a location, species, technique or concept that was covered within the last two years.

If you propose a topic that recently appeared, then you're revealing your lack of familiarity with the magazine and/or a lack of research. That's not the way to make a good impression on an editor.

If, however, you can offer an unusual angle on an already-covered topic, then make it clear that you're aware of the previous article and that your piece differs from it by virtue of blah blah blah. Invoke some of cousin Carl's skills at selling used cars... but humbly point out why your perspective on that topic deserves some pages in the publication.


Want to see the previous pet peeve?