OUTREACH & PR

Pitch a contributed article to an editor

Use when you want to write for a publication rather than be quoted in it, and the section already has regular contributors.

contributed-article-pitch-editor.md

Download .md

You are a contributing editor who rejects most submissions. You are writing the pitch that gets an article commissioned, not the article.

Publication and section: {{PUBLICATION_AND_SECTION}}
Their contributor guidelines, pasted: {{CONTRIBUTOR_GUIDELINES}}
Recent pieces that section ran, with headlines and authors: {{RECENT_SECTION_ARTICLES}}
My argument, stated as a claim: {{MY_ARGUMENT}}
Evidence I can bring to it: {{MY_EVIDENCE}}

Output four numbered sections.
1. A fit check: whether {{MY_ARGUMENT}} repeats anything in {{RECENT_SECTION_ARTICLES}}, and which rules in {{CONTRIBUTOR_GUIDELINES}} on length, promotion, exclusivity and bylines it fails. Name each failure.
2. Three headline and standfirst pairs in the house format of {{PUBLICATION_AND_SECTION}}, each taking a different angle on {{MY_ARGUMENT}}.
3. The pitch email under 140 words: the argument in the first sentence, the structure as four section headings, one line naming the strongest item in {{MY_EVIDENCE}}, and a delivery date.
4. The first 90 words of the article as they would be published, so the editor can judge the prose.

Rules:
- The argument must be contestable. If no informed reader would dispute it, say so and write nothing else.
- Every claim in the sample opening must trace to {{MY_EVIDENCE}}. Where it cannot, write NEEDS EVIDENCE.
- No em dashes, no thought leadership, no closing paragraph restating the pitch.

Fill in before running

Replace each placeholder with your own detail. The more specific you are, the less the model invents.

{{PUBLICATION_AND_SECTION}}
{{CONTRIBUTOR_GUIDELINES}}
{{RECENT_SECTION_ARTICLES}}
{{MY_ARGUMENT}}
{{MY_EVIDENCE}}

Getting a better result

Paste the guidelines rather than summarising them. The rules on promotion and exclusivity are where most contributed pitches die.
The sample opening is the part an editor actually reads. If you would not publish those 90 words, do not send the pitch.
If it tells you the argument is not contestable, that is why your last three pitches went unanswered.

Questions about this prompt

When should I pitch rather than write the article and send it?

When you want the byline and the section already has regular contributors you have to displace. Writing first and sending the finished piece is the common alternative and wastes the days it takes, since most sections commission from a pitch and reject unsolicited drafts without reading far.

What does the fit check need from the publication?

The contributor guidelines pasted rather than summarised, recent pieces from that section with headlines and authors, your argument stated as a claim someone could dispute, and your evidence. The rules on length, promotion, exclusivity and bylines are where most contributed pitches die, and a summary loses exactly those.

What comes back, and what will the editor judge me on?

A fit check naming each guideline you fail and any overlap with recent pieces, three headline and standfirst pairs, an email under 140 words, and the first 90 words of the article. Those 90 words are the part an editor actually reads. If you would not publish them, do not send.

What gets a contributed pitch ignored?

Pitching an argument no informed reader would dispute. The prompt is told to stop and say so, and that verdict explains a run of unanswered pitches better than the email wording ever will. Watch for NEEDS EVIDENCE in the sample opening too, since untraceable claims do not survive an editor.