6 Reasons Why You’re Getting Constantly Rejected From Publications
It’s one of the most common questions I get asked: “How do I get into this publication?” or “This publication won’t accept my work and I don’t know why. Can you help?”
The reason it’s such a common ask is because publications can be the jumping-off platform from writing for yourself and your followers, to writing for a much larger audience. My stories that get into publications typically do much better than those that don’t. It’s not a guarantee, but it’s a chance for your work to really fly.
It’s why I was so excited to get the chance to interview the editor for one of the most popular publications - Mind Cafe. He personally sees (and rejects) nearly 50 blog posts per day - and he had a ton of tips for new and experienced writers alike who want to access Mind Cafe. But the insights he shared are applicable for all publications, not just theirs.
At the end of the day, consider your submission to be like a job application, or asking someone on a date. You’re asking them to take a chance on you, and this is your chance to convince them.
If you prefer reading to watching, read on below. These were Reed’s main reasons he rejects stories for Mind Cafe. Avoid these and get your work into your dream publications!
You’re Writing the Same Type of Stories That Were Accepted 2 Months Ago
Every single platform on this earth changes - one of the best qualifications for success is if you’re able to change with it. As blog platforms and publications like Mind Cafe shift their priorities and mission, it’s likely that their requirements for having pieces published in their publication will change, too.
Reed explained that Mind Cafe has been undergoing serious changes of its own, and that stories he would have happily accepted a few months back are no longer what he’s looking for today.
If you’re finding that your stories were once easily published in a publication and are no longer getting in, make sure you closely scrutinize what’s being accepted into the publication today, and watch if it’s shifting. This allows you to keep your finger on the pulse of what’s accepted in your dream publication.
You’re Not Acting on Feedback.
Many times, editors will give reasons why work wasn’t accepted, with an invitation to correct it and try again. Reed explained that he and the other Mind Cafe editors try their hardest to give at least one reason to new writers especially why their work wasn’t accepted.
However, editors don’t have time to offer an essay on how to improve your story to their standards - they can only give a nudge in the right direction. Reed explained that many times, he leaves a note to the writer to tighten the introduction. The writer fixes the first line, and resubmits - only to be annoyed when they get rejected again.
If an editor has gone to the effort of giving you feedback on a draft, don’t just fix the single item they point out, because it’s likely a prevalent issue throughout your story. Instead, take the opportunity and revise your entire draft through the lens of that feedback if you want to be accepted on your second go-round.
You’re Chopping Up and Reconstituting Existing Material
Reed explained that many times, they see writers more or less copy a successful 6-bullet listicle in the genre, and add on a 7th bullet to “make it their own.”
The only problem is that the editors naturally read, publish and reject so many of these that they’re well aware of all the tropes, and it’s blindingly obvious to him and other editors that’s the work is a ripoff. Reconstructing other lists, adding just a single original perspective is lazy work and it’s immediately apparent - and rejected.
It’s totally OK to be inspired by the works of others, and of course there are so many listicles nowadays that it’s impossible to avoid overlapping with some others. However, when you’re writing your own story, at least do the basic work of ensuring you’re not completely copying other work, or you have at least applied your own thoughts to the work.
You’re Only Copying What’s Successful
The body of work for self-help publications is especially guilty of this, but it’s true for any genre of work: a lot of the stories are like trends and fads, that come in and out of style. The problem is there are some evergreen topics that are highly successful, so aspiring authors copy them again and again.
Reed explained that many of the stories he sees and rejects are iterations of the same type of story - morning routines, New Year’s resolutions, reading faster, and so on. But of course editors see so many of these that when they see them again, it’s almost like an instant rejection.
This doesn’t mean you can’t write about these topics at all, but just that you have to put a new spin on them. One example Reed mentioned was how to deal with burnout - in activism. Of course burnout is a very typical topic, but the activism aspect was new. As a result, he included it happily in the publication.
You’re Not Doing the Bare Minimum
Editors don’t want to be doing copy-editing - they want to be focusing on raising your work to the next level, not fixing typos. For that reason, when editors like Reed see a typo in the first paragraph, they’ll assume you didn’t take care with your story and that it isn’t worth their time
Consider that when you submit your work to a publication, you’re asking them to associate your work with theirs. The good editors will take some time to make significant changes to your story - elevating it to the standard that their publication is known for. You benefit from this, so it makes sense that you’d want to only submit your very best work. If you can’t even do a single proofread, then editors will spare themselves the effort of fixing all your typos. If you can’t go to the effort, why should they?
What I do is read my stories aloud before submitting them to any publication. By forcing yourself to slow down, it’s more likely you’ll catch some of these simple mistakes before your potential editors do.
You’re Including Irrelevant Details
When you publish something, you’re asking both publications and readers to take a chance on your work. I know I’m guilty of this - when I’m reading, if I’m not hooked in the first few sentences, I’m out. Even if it’s halfway through and I notice there are some off-topic sentences, I quickly lose interest.
That’s why Reed says this is another one of the reasons he rejects work. If the subject is “six ways to be a good friend,” and the author goes into irrelevant depth on what color hair his friend has, it’s grounds for rejection.
If this is a problem you’re struggling with, what I do is print the whole story out. I go over it with a pencil and ensure that every single sentence is relevant. If I bring up a detail early on, I make sure it’s referenced later on in a way that makes sense. If I start going off on a tangent, I rein in my ego and delete it.
Publications are trying to do what you are: attract, establish a reputation with and entertain readers. Help them do that with your stories and you’ll go far.
It’s scary to do your best work and submit it. It’s scary to admit that you tried the very hardest you could, because then if you get rejected, you don’t have any excuses: you have to admit that you just weren’t good enough. That’s why so many of us - myself included! - take shortcuts with our work. Then when we inevitably get rejected, we have that fallback. “Well, I didn’t really try that hard. I didn’t even proofread it. It probably wasn’t my best work.”
However, being a successful blogger means relying on the tools at hand. If a publication is willing to consider adding your work to their publication, take the leap, be brave, and go to every effort to make your work worthy of the publications you’re asking to accept them. Take rejection as encouragement to try harder. When your story is finally accepted into the publication of your dreams, it will all have been worth it.
