Earlier in my freelance career, I used to pursue editors and publications who had a bad rep among freelance writers. Even though other writers warned me "So-and-so is a real PITA" or "Such-and-such magazine is notorious for changing editorial directions and killing stories at the last minute," I thought I could be the exception (in terms of interpersonal communication, not late-paying pubs). I thought if I was friendly and flexible and turned in flawless copy that I could manage those kinds of editors and have things go my way.
Well, as Justin Long's character says in He's Just Not That Into You, "you are not the exception. You are the rule."Trust me on this, writers. When you're hearing from multiple sources that some editor or client isn't worth your time, it's usually because it's true. And you are not going to change them. Granted, there are a few prima donna writers out there, but most of the writers I compare notes with are not difficult or disorganized. They work hard to meet deadlines and uncover interesting sources and come up with snappy titles just like I do. And if they can't make it work with an editor, it's likely that I may have all or some of the same issues. (I'm not talking about one or two writers with issues. If I can find multiple threads about the same publication and their potentially shady practices, that's more than enough for me.) I wish I'd figured that out a whole lot earlier and saved myself the hours of frustation. There are enough editors and publications out there that you don't need to subject yourself to writer bashing. Your turn! What do you wish you'd learned sooner? And have you found that other writer's warnings end up being true?
Flickr photo courtesy of WTL Photos