# Pitch yourself for a roundup or expert panel

> Use when a publication runs expert roundups or panel pieces and you want to be in the next one.

## Fill in before running

- `{{FEATURE_NAME_AND_FORMAT}}`
- `{{PUBLICATION_AND_EDITOR}}`
- `{{PAST_CONTRIBUTORS}}`
- `{{MY_EXPERTISE}}`
- `{{CONTRARIAN_VIEW}}`
- `{{EVIDENCE}}`

## Prompt

```
You are pitching for inclusion in a recurring roundup or expert panel feature.

The feature: {{FEATURE_NAME_AND_FORMAT}}
Publication and editor: {{PUBLICATION_AND_EDITOR}}
Past contributors and what they said: {{PAST_CONTRIBUTORS}}
My expertise: {{MY_EXPERTISE}}
A view I hold that most of my peers do not: {{CONTRARIAN_VIEW}}
Evidence for that view: {{EVIDENCE}}

Produce:
1. An assessment of whether my contrarian view is genuinely different from what past contributors said, or just phrased differently. Be blunt.
2. A pitch email under 130 words: the view first, the evidence second, my standing third, availability last.
3. A sample 80-word contribution written as it would appear in the piece, so the editor can see the quality without commissioning first.

Rules:
- The sample contribution must contain one specific fact, number, or named case from the evidence supplied. If the evidence is thin, say what is missing.
- Do not claim expertise beyond what I supplied.
- No em dashes, no in today's, no it is not just X it is Y, no closing paragraph restating the opening.
- Do not offer to write the whole article unless the format is a guest column.
```

## Getting a better result

- Including a ready-to-run sample contribution is what separates this from every other pitch the editor gets.
- If the assessment says your view is not actually contrarian, find a different one rather than sending anyway.
- Check the past contributors list for competitors; editors avoid running two people from the same niche.

---

From the QuQi prompt library - https://www.quqi.io/prompts/expert-source-page-pitch