BootsnAll Travel Community

I would like to raise a general point and would very much welcome feedback as to whether my perspective on this issue is just way out of line with the prevailing norms.

I help edit a magazine. Like most travel magazines in Europe, we pay a small fee to our authors. No great riches, but a sum that underpins our respect for and gratitude to those who take the time and trouble to write for us. We say in our submission guidelines that any piece submitted must be previously unpublished (and we emphasise that web publication counts, for us at least, as ‘prior publication’).

Most would-be authors seem to respect our position, but a small minority do not. Only a tiny percentage of our would-be authors are from North America – scarcely surprising as we are Europe-based. But it is with small group that we seem so very often to encounter the problem of prior publication. We had an instance of getting a piece quite close to publication, only then to find that it appeared in a US magazine two years earlier. Fortunately we had not yet paid the author and it was not too late to pull the article. Then last month we were sent an essay which we now find was published in the travel stories section on Bootsnall only a few weeks earlier.

In Europe there have been instances of publishers taking legal action against authors who represent their work as being unpublished (often under such arcane rubrics as ‘obtaining pecuniary advantage through misrepresentation'). I cannot image that we would ever dream of taking such action. Yet the problem is a perturbing one, and one that I never quite know how to handle.

I have never written for US print publications, so have not real reference point for comparison. Is it really considered just a bit of good luck if you get paid twice for the same travel article without either publisher knowing of the other? Or would the same ethical consideration prevail as those with which I am familiar in the European market.

I much look forward to any thoughts and wisdom that others here may have to offer.
Nicky

quote:

Originally posted by Nicky Gardner:
Like most travel magazines in Europe, we pay a small fee to our authors. No great riches, but a sum that underpins our respect for and gratitude to those who take the time and trouble to write for us. We say in our submission guidelines that any piece submitted must be previously unpublished (and we emphasise that web publication counts, for us at least, as ‘prior publication’).

Hi Nicky- I'm not exactly schooled in the legalities of intercontinental editorials. But I am a writer and was very interested in your question.

From a moral standpoint, I would imagine writers would respect your First Publication request. I would. I swear! And it's never acceptable for a writer to misrepresent their work or attempt to dupe an editor.

HOWEVER, as a writer who puts a lot of time, effort, and research into crafting quality articles, I have to admit, it's very frustrating when editors "pay a small fee" yet extend such high requirements as limiting writers to never-before-seen pieces. I assume the majority of your writers are new, unestablished, and happy to simply get published. Which is great! But paying writers for "respect" and "gratitude" isn't enough. You're paying them for the work. And if your pay is very, very low, it may not be incentive enough to turn over an original piece (which, for a writer, is very valuable).

"Is it really considered just a bit of good luck if you get paid twice for the same travel article without either publisher knowing of the other? Or would the same ethical consideration prevail as those with which I am familiar in the European market."

On the contrary, at least in the US, it's considered good business. Unless an editor purchases First Publication Rights (or other copyrights which essentially prevent the writer from re-selling the piece), the writer is free to publish the same article how ever many times they wish. But most publications do require knowledge of where/when the previously published article appeared. Which is fine and dandy - and morally/legally necessary for the writer to abide by.

I checked out your submissions guidelines, out of curiosity, and noticed you don't mention two important elements: word count or pay rate. Those might be helpful to solidify your expectations.

Hi girlgoesglobal

Thanks so much for your thoughtful reply. I take your key point that it is seen as good business in the US to resell the same article over and over again. I would judge that in the European market (at least in the small parts of it I know) one might normally at least rewrite the piece - new title, some reordering of the text, new emphasis with additional material added, different pics. I think what you say goes a long way to explaining the fact that the texts we receive for consideration from North American authors have on occasions already been published elsewhere.

The rates we offer are in line with those prevailing elsewhere in central Europe. I guess writers submitting to magazines in our region (Berlin, Warsaw, Prague) will not usually expect the same rates as similar material might command in London, Paris or Dublin. Our payments would be seen, I’d say, as at least average and possibly even good by regional standards. Our writers are pretty well all professional writers. Not so much the new and unestablished (as you infer), but rather mature and established! And I guess everyone who submits material has seen the magazine, even knows it well, and realises very fully that we are more akin to Granta than Condé Nast Traveler – a small niche publication with no advertising that serves a limited market.

We have had no difficulty at all securing good previously unpublished material. We have accepted about one in every thirty articles that come our way. We nonetheless review and respond to every single enquiry. By the way, we only ask for the courtesy of first publication. The copyright of the piece rests with the author.

But your comment on the business sense that drives some authors to send us previously published material, even when we explicity say we want unpublished material, is interesting and helpful. A reflection possibly of the different ethics in publication – and arguably much more acute business sense – that might prevail in the USA. It helps me to be more alert to the issue in the future. Sincere thanks.

Nicky,

I have to question how established and professional these writers are that are trying to sell you published "unpublished articles." Any professional writer trying to build a good name in the industry would not do such things.

I'm ashamed that some of my countrymen would pull such a stunt, but I can't imagine it's an American thing. Stupidity has no nationality.

Good luck!

Hey Nicky,

Nice to see your name again (I edited an anthology of travel essays--Travelers' Tales Prague--and included a piece by Nicky). I agree with GirlGoesGlobal. The travel writing biz pays so badly, many writers try to recycle their articles to try to make some extra money. And if a publication already pays a low fee for the story--and you have to pay your bills with your writing--it makes at least financial sense for the writer to try and re-sell their articles.

But one point that hasn't been covered yet is this: with the exception of The New York Times, The Washington Post, and a couple other newspaper travel sections in North America, it's perfectly acceptable to try to re-sell your previously published travel piece to another travel section and you, as the writer, are under no obligation to tell the editor that it was previously published. This sounded a bit curious to me at first (mainly the part about not mentioning the piece was previosuly published), but I've since asked many of my other travel writing friends and they tell me it's true. So, this might give you some insight as to why your potential writers from North America aren't volunteering the info that their pieces were previously published.

Hopefully I'll make it out to Berlin again soon and we can go for a drink.

cheers,
farley

I'm all for reselling articles, but when a publication specifically states that they want original material only, that's what I'm going to give them unless I want to risk pissing them off. Maybe, I'm missing something here, but I think those writer's in question made a mistake. I appreciate it's hard out there to make it as a travel writer (and pimp), but pissing off editors is kinda counter-productive.

Nicky's mag is pretty clear on this:

quote:

Of course we require that all material submitted be original and unpublished. We judge something to have already been published even if it has appeared only in a webzine. hidden europe requires original material.

Recycle and resell stories to magazines that publish previously published material and/or don't ask for 1st rights, but writers should not submit published pieces to a publication that states and restates that they want original material only.

Personally, I wish there were more outlets for recycled material, but it seems that Nicky's isn't one. Wanna reconsider Nicky? I've got a great story about spending the night in Prague as a honorary firefighter. But alas, it's been published...and published again...and published again...etc.

Kelsey- I don't think anyone is endorsing the deception of editors. In fact, seems we all agree that it's necessary to follow the rules of a publication. As writers, our reputation is a powerful commodity that we'd be foolish to tarnish by pulling a fast-one just to get something published.

But I'm not surprised that some amateur, or even desperate, writers might think "ah, well, who will know?" and roll the dice by sending a previously published article. It happens. Not everyone is honest.

I think this is really just a result of the increasing difficulty in making a living this way. Printed publications are declining, so work for these publications is declining, so people are going freelance and trying to make as much money as possible by selling articles to more than one outlet/publication.

Whilst this is morally wrong when the publication specifies that articles should be unpublished (as in your case, Nicky), on the other hand, I see little problem with articles being published multiple times under the correct circumstances (where first publishing/sole publishing isn't demanded). This would help the author gain exposure, and help him/her make a living.

quote:

Originally posted by Darcy Perkins:
Printed publications are declining

Not true. Statistics are hard to find on this, but the much heralded death of print is less of a reality than people think it is.

Source: BOWKER INDUSTRY REPORT
New Book Titles and Editions, 2002-2006 (USA)
http://www.bowker.com/news/statistics.htm

Fiction
2002 25,102
2003 24,666
2004 38,832
2005 34,927
2006 42,076 (projected)

Travel
2002 4,316
2003 4,172
2004 5,304
2005 4,941
2006 5,155 (projected)

Total
2002 247,777
2003 266,322
2004 295,523
2005 282,500
2006 291,922 (projected)

That's a 15% increase from 2002 to 2006 for total books published.

If it's magazines we're talking about then I think it's more a matter of staying power. More magazines come and go faster, but there are still a lot out there at any given time.

I was talking about magazines. With the ascent of the internet, comes the decline of print magazines (and newspapers). I know there are still lots of magazines that keep publishing, and are profitable, but there's no denying magazines are declining. Many/most magazines are now also online in some form, bringing in more income.

Books, on the other hand, are staying around for a long time. There isn't really anything digital that can beat a book available right now...The Kindle is okay, but not great.

I guess i should have been more clear about what i meant. I just assumed since this article was about a magazine, it would be assumed that's what i meant.

Number of Magazine Titles as per the National (US) Directory of Magazines:
2002 17321
2003 17254
2004 18821
2005 18267
2006 19419
src.

I'd argue that there are more options than ever for freelancers to have their work published in paying markets. The web is loaded with sites trying to snag stories and articles without compensating the authors, but there is an ever-expanding group of site owners who have realized that they need to pay their writers to get decent content.

Back to the original topic, I think there is a bit of a north american tendency to glorify (too strong of a word perhaps?) the prankster or law-breaker who gets away with it. There is something of a prevailing attitude that it's only wrong if you get caught, otherwise it makes for great sitcom fodder. Any writer with even half a set of ethics should respect guidelines, but I see too much of a tendency to either not bother reading all the instructions, or to have the mistaken impression that the rules don't apply to everyone. It's my opinion that this is a question of apathy and disrespect rather than freelancers falling on hard times.

quote:

we pay a small fee to our authors. No great riches, but a sum that underpins our respect for and gratitude to those who take the time and trouble to write for us

I don't know what this fee is, but I can see a bit of a north american attitude (and yes, I lump my polite Canadian brethren into this group) to view a lesser paying publication as a softer target that they able to care less about following clear guidelines.

I don't know that any other country in the world is any better or more professional in this aspect, but from what I've seen in all the jobs I've held here, it's quite common for people to not spend enough time reading the obvious details. Act first, think later, seems to be a general mindset among a lot of us these days.

As a writer (former freelance, now full time) I never submitted a previously published article to another magazine.

However, sometimes writers submit the same article to several magazines in the idea of getting it published. So while they didn't do that on purpose, an article might have been published already but only because of this "way of thinking".

The only time i use this "technique" is when i need to submit the articles I need to to graduate Masters so that if one magazine doesn't approve it, another might. But i always write that in the email/letter accompanying the article ("Also sent to X magazine; waiting for reply by ...").

ps: I also admit that it's frustrating to get $10 for an article that took hours to research and write...which obviously means that magazines open the road for the rubbish articles and not so good writers

I should like to thank everyone who contributed to this excellent thread. I have certainly learnt a lot and feel much indebted to those who enlightened me as to how the question of submissions is handled in the USA.

I am also grateful to the moderators who intervened to remove one comment that was shockingly racist.

From girlgoesglobal, I realise that I simply don't have the business sense that would be the norm in North America. Yes, resubmission makes good business sense. And yes, Farley, next time your European wanderings bring you through Berlin, please do stop by. I owe you more than just a drink! You were an excellent editor with the Prague book, and decent enough to accept from me a recycled piece that had already been published (yes, yes, even I sometimes submit the same piece twice, but Farley did know! No secrets!).

Hope the Prague Firefighter stories runs and runs, Touron King. And makes you rich. But why not spend a day or two as an Honorary Firefighter somewhere else (say, Moldova or Svalbard), and when the story gets a new incarnation in another locality, please send it my way to take a look at it.

What else? Well, most of all, I've realised that the wording I use about the fees paid by hidden europe is too European and understated. In making reference to a small fee, I had never thought that folk might take that to be something as derisory as just $10. It is frankly appalling that any magazine pays as little.

Yes, we are small. We accept no advertising, and pander to a niche market. Our cover price is low, for many readers are in poorer countries in eastern Europe where even a modest mag sub can make a dent in the weekly budget. But the rates we pay are in keeping with what one gets elsewhere in central Europe. Perhaps something like $300 for a typical piece. That I know is less than many London-based English language publications. But it seems to me to be a reasonable fee for the market in which we are based (not least as are not purchasing any rights beyond the privilege to print first. Copyright remains with the author).

I find Bootsnall so very good for discussing this kind of topic. Thank you all.
Nicky

Nicky,

I made the $10 comment as a general statement. I do know magazines (on line ones) that pay $10-20 per article and honestly I wouldn't even consider submitting there (that's if i ever go back to freelancing, hardly likely).

The thing is that as long as there will be ppl willing to work for those money, there will be magazine/sites which pay only such rates. Too bad and too frustrating for someone who really likes what they do and won't mind actually living off it!

I'm guessing a good US/UK magazine would pay around 7c/10c per word, right?

ps: I noticed you haven't published anything abt Romania.