Every time you do one of these exposés, Becky, I feel like kicking myself for doing everything as a lit mag editor in my free time...for free. Clearly, I could be raking it in if I just followed all of them!
Also, the part about submissions falling off really does make no sense. My own experience with Eunoia Review after nearly 15 years is that the volume may spike here and there, but if you're putting out issues consistently and have some semi-active social media presence, the submissions will keep coming. (Admittedly, it also helped that my quick turnaround time kept Eunoia on lists like Duotrope's fastest markets, which definitely gave a boost to the publication's general visibility for writers looking for places to submit.)
Have you always had a quick turnaround or did you change things up at some point for quicker response? I'm looking to make some publication changes that will include quicker response. It's encouraging to hear your story.
Becky, as always, this is very helpful. What irks me is when you approach Submittable about these bogus publications, they look the other way as if nothing wrong is going on.
Here is my list of other lit mags and publishers that I have come across as being rather sketchy. (Yes, I am naming names.)
The Letter Review
Lit Magazine (supposedly connected with the New School but I had stories there with no respond for two years.)
Western Humanities Review (no response in two years)
Driftwood Press (says free, but you have to purchase something in order to submit)
WILDSound Writing Festival (Charges up to 100 and everyone is accepted. In other words, you pay them to put you in some website)
Fjords Review (quite a scam. I actually submitted to them a few years back and nothing happened)
Atmosphere Press (vanity press)
Austin Macauley (they pretend to be a real press, but after telling you their boar read your work and liked it, they offer a contract for 5 grant that YOU have to pay them to work together and publish)
Black Spring Press, London (I actually won several of their competitions, but they never responded after that and instead started another contest)
Western Humanities Review never responded to me and I withdrew. Submitted 9/6/22 and on 3/1/25, I sent along this: <Pretty sure this submission from 2022 will never be read, and while it was funny to watch it in my queue, that particular thrill is gone.>
Luis, what's up with Steel Toe Books? I thought about sending them something. I didn't rule out doing that, just decided to try other options first. But it sounds as if I should rule them out.
Becky did a whole thing on Steel Toe a while ago. They were legit and then got taken over by a duo or trio that are unscrupulous. I cannot recall all of the details.
For my part anyway, a lit mag that emphasizes the money angle so much has a bad smell. Yes, it takes resources to run a project, but for a small independent journal (like mine), it's really not as much as some people make it out to be. It seems to me that some places are looking to cash in on people's hopes.
Of course, that's nothing new and we simply need to be vigilant and try to spot what's real and what looks like a milking farm.
Still, as you mention Becky, promotion is part of the process, but hopefully it can be done with a little finesse, which is why I will attempt to gently slip in a reminder that Dog Throat Journal (don't need to link, easy to google) is open for subs and a no fee contest with prizes that I'm personally funding because I want to find some lovely stories and kick the project up a couple of notches.
I look forward to the next part about web sites. I love it when lit mags publish online, at least part of the work so we can read it, but it's important to put thought and effort into the design, too. I cruise a lot of sites and I've seen good designs I'd like to maybe be a part of, and others that seem to be quickly hacked out.
Well, you're right-- for lit mags today, it has to be a labor of love for both writer and publisher/editor--alas! But then we're making magic--throwing a ball hard and fast is not magical, just muscle. But then lies always sell easier than truth.....
Paris Review has assets over $11,000,000. Recent donors include the Silicon Valley Community Foundation, which was founded in 2006 with donations by multi-billionaires Mark Zuckerberg and Reed Hastings, among others. (Let's not forget also that the same publication notoriously was founded in 1950 with monies from the CIA, a fact which came out decades later.)
What would a Mark Zuckerberg gain from indirectly funding a literary magazine? Like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and a couple others, he's worth $200 billion-with-a-b. Money to burn. These guys are out to control every aspect of society-- see Peter Thiel, patron of J.D. Vance, and HIS involvement with the cultural world c/o Dimes Square and other trendy happenings.
Yeah, there are a lot of scamsters in every aspect of America at the moment. But some are small-time grifters, while others are very, very big players.
I suspect Paris Review is not funded *directly* by venture capitalists but rather by grants sponsored by the Silicon Valley Foundation. Just as lit mags were not funded *directly* by the CIA but rather it's cutout, The Congress for Cultural Freedom.
This distinction is important, I think, because grant applications require work. Regardless of who provides the funds, such journals are putting in at least a modicum of effort to obtain grant funding.
It seems misleading for Street Lit to say they're not funded by VC's, as though VC's are just throwing money at lit mags. Often some work is involved by these editors to obtain such funds. Street Lit is not incapable of doing such work, if they seek that funding.
Anyway, thanks for this info. It's all quite interesting!
I doubt Mark Zuckerberg has any interest in controlling the content of the Paris Review. It’s much more likely that he is a fan of the magazine, or he thinks it lends him some prestige to be a “supporter of the arts.”
I mentioned that it's an indirect investment. He probably doesn't know about the specific grant. More likely is that SVCF has a mission which includes investments in the arts, the second of your listed possibilities. I doubt seriously that Zuckerberg or Hastings themselves have ever read the magazine.
"Litmags" can be capitalised or not; to do so isn't a spelling error (I agree that it would be better as two words - though it would be better still as "literary magazines"). Worse, "no-one" isn't a spelling mistake, though it's more common in the U.K. (and Canada?) than in the U.S. In any case, if (genuine) errors of spelling and syntax indicated scams, then I'm sorry to say that nowadays there’d be few magazines (or authors) not tarred with that brush.
Spelling & syntax errors alone, I agree, do not indicate a scam. They are concerning, though, when an outlet is attempting to sell professional editing services. They also indicate lack of professionalism and attention to language, which we should expect from lit mags.
I disagree about the capitalization of "lit" in the sentence above!
Yes - I especially bridle when I see errors of syntax in adverts for copy-editing... (I think that capitalising "Literary" would probably be pompous, but not a spelling error.)
No-one is incorrect. Many eons ago, it was hyphenated. Then it became none. No one is fine. People are hyphenating all kinds of things that do not need it. Drives me nuts. When I taught grammar I had all 58 rules of hyphenation memorized. Not anymore, but I know what gets hyphenated and what does not. And, yes, I will die on this hill.
"... your book will be good enough ..." mixed reaction: acid reflux combined with hilarity. I'm glad scammers are so dumb, it helps to root them out. Also, for somebody peddling editing services, their writing is atrocious.
One would think that before settling down to create and publish a lit mag, people would curb their idealism and actually assess what the costs will be. And how much does it cost to maintain a website and online presence? Certainly not as must as the costs of printing a magazine, as was the practice in the Old Days Before the Internet. btw, I have occasionally edited novels and other types of manuscripts for writers. My fee is $100 an hour. My wife says that's too cheap.
$100/hour is about right. I tend to start at $42 (half the rate I should really charge) ... for marketing work I do (as a freelancer), it's typically been $70+ (but I usually can only get this work through recruiters and they take 50%).
If I wanted to earn money in the writing and publishing world, running a literary magazine would certainly not be my first choice. Editorial services and workshops would be better choices, and some lit mags appear to be offering them now in the wake of NEA cuts and other funding challenges. These new offerings (or maybe continued offerings) offer a value added to publishing contributor work.
I am often dazzled at the process such as it is. My strategy has always been twofold when deciding on litmags or publishing houses. I'm especially comfortable submitting to places where like minded authors have appeared. And then I look for publishers whose products I like to read.
My submissions often follow the trail of people I know and I also barter my being "first eyes" for someone's work in exchange for them looking my stuff over. It's worked so far I guess.
In any case I don't think I've ever submitted anywhere I haven't familiarized myself with first. So if a lit mag is new to me I'll get an issue or two to look over first before sending anything which, I suppose, is the time-honored old school way of doing things.
This all may be only subject-adjacent to the OP but something in me got triggered real hard when I saw the $6500 thing. Kind of blurred out all that came before. Jesus...
My understanding is that "no-one" (with hyphen) is rarely used, though it might be acceptable at times. "No one" is the common spelling. As I personally tripped up over reading it, use of the hyphenated version makes me question the editors' experience. But I appreciate you noting this! Were this the only abnormality in the letter, it would certainly be less concerning.
I personally prefer "no-one" when referring to "not anyone." It is more explicit and clearer. "No one" I expect to be followed by a noun, as in, "In this situation, no one answer is correct."
As a far-from-young Brit, I can assure you that "no one" (without a hyphen) is the common usage in the UK and has been for as long as I can remember. N.B. There are few absolutes in English hyphenation and punctuation.
I agree with Lorraine that "no-one" (with hyphen) is very commonly used in British English and is considered correct there. When I was a philosophy student, I noticed this, and noticed too that some Anglophile American philosophers adopted this usage also.
*** RE: StreetLit moaned: "Gradually, submissions decline…” BECKY TUCH wrote: "Uh, I’m sorry, what?" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . How do I scold thee, StreetLit? Let me count the ways (and address Becky's question, too). *** #!. Your subs have declined because writers wised up. On Submittable, your listing is categorized as "no fee" - - but there IS a fee because StreetLit is hoping to game the system. You also try to fool us by appearing DAILY on page 1 as "almost ready to close." *** #2. Your website design is atrocious & since March 5th there's been NO new content. *** #3. StreetLit inundates past submitters with fake come-hither ploys - - "We're closing soon but got few submissions. Why don't you send us something?" - - when StreetLit only wants more $$. *** #4. StreetLit offers paid feedback but delivers rudeness and sass. *** #5. Your domain registration on WhoIs was marked "private" instead of revealing that you are Dinu from Copenhagen, Sjælland. No one put a gun to your head to start StreetLit, did they, Dinu? Kindly reply!
Thank you, Nolo! And let me mention that I've shared your wise saying - - "The M.F.A. Mafia" - - and everybody who's heard it agrees you deserve a listing in "Brainy Quotes." Much respect sent to you, my friend.
Apologies to the folks who receive income from "editing services" while at the same time editing lit mags (two words), but there is a conflict of interests there big enough to fit a semi with an extra trailer. Why do these editors think a writer would choose them over an editing service that specifically advertises itself as such and is not associated with a lit mag? No surprise here: because they think that editor will be so stunned by their work or bribed by their payment that their manuscript will be chosen for publication. Then it doesn't happen. Or, worse: it does happen. First, what kind of editing job would such conflicted editors do? Probably not great if they don't respect the author--and how could they respect someone who chose them under these circumstances. Second, what kind of press allows its editors to engage in this sort of thing? Probably one that does not intend to work very hard on behalf of the book. If someone legitimately wants to get detailed advice on revising a manuscript, they should (a) hire someone they respect (which can be for a variety of reasons) and/or (b) take a course that will help or matriculate in an MFA program that includes such a course. (I don't love MFA programs, but some probably offer good courses in this sort of thing.) The alternative that I prefer is for the author to ask smart friends to read the manuscript and make suggestions.
The rejection letter from Neon Origami absolutely screams ‘run like the wind.’ “With the right revisions, your book would be good enough that many publishers would be happy to accept it.” Nope. That’s a promise that cannot be made to a writer, ever. In the uncertain world of trade publishing, even experienced literary agents would be very unlikely to make such a promise. To dangle it in front of a hopeful author is both deceptive and cruel.
Becky, I want to thank you again on behalf of all of us poor but noble writers who gain so much from L.M.N. You are a protector at heart, the director of the Wordsmith FBI. There have always been thieves, but today they prey everywhere it seems , and now, even in the creative arts.
I again urge all fellow writers to not pay fees, for anything. And yes, the $250 would no doubt be for an AI generated editing, but that $6,500 fee seems really pricey too-- how many hours to read and edit 300 pages? Say 10 [at $650 per hour!!!] or stretch it to 20 hours, at $325 bucks/hour-- does it really take a pro two and a half days to edit a medium length MS?
Finally, how do you know an editor will improve the work, or maybe make it worse? I just got an email from one yesterday who completely misread a poem of mine, taking it quite literally--whatever happened to poetic license?
Every time you do one of these exposés, Becky, I feel like kicking myself for doing everything as a lit mag editor in my free time...for free. Clearly, I could be raking it in if I just followed all of them!
Also, the part about submissions falling off really does make no sense. My own experience with Eunoia Review after nearly 15 years is that the volume may spike here and there, but if you're putting out issues consistently and have some semi-active social media presence, the submissions will keep coming. (Admittedly, it also helped that my quick turnaround time kept Eunoia on lists like Duotrope's fastest markets, which definitely gave a boost to the publication's general visibility for writers looking for places to submit.)
Have you always had a quick turnaround or did you change things up at some point for quicker response? I'm looking to make some publication changes that will include quicker response. It's encouraging to hear your story.
Always had it!
Becky, as always, this is very helpful. What irks me is when you approach Submittable about these bogus publications, they look the other way as if nothing wrong is going on.
Here is my list of other lit mags and publishers that I have come across as being rather sketchy. (Yes, I am naming names.)
The Letter Review
Lit Magazine (supposedly connected with the New School but I had stories there with no respond for two years.)
Western Humanities Review (no response in two years)
Driftwood Press (says free, but you have to purchase something in order to submit)
WILDSound Writing Festival (Charges up to 100 and everyone is accepted. In other words, you pay them to put you in some website)
Fjords Review (quite a scam. I actually submitted to them a few years back and nothing happened)
Atmosphere Press (vanity press)
Austin Macauley (they pretend to be a real press, but after telling you their boar read your work and liked it, they offer a contract for 5 grant that YOU have to pay them to work together and publish)
Black Spring Press, London (I actually won several of their competitions, but they never responded after that and instead started another contest)
Pank Magazine (no response in over a year)
Pub House Books
Steel Toe Books
That's my list.
Western Humanities Review never responded to me and I withdrew. Submitted 9/6/22 and on 3/1/25, I sent along this: <Pretty sure this submission from 2022 will never be read, and while it was funny to watch it in my queue, that particular thrill is gone.>
Luis, what's up with Steel Toe Books? I thought about sending them something. I didn't rule out doing that, just decided to try other options first. But it sounds as if I should rule them out.
Becky did a whole thing on Steel Toe a while ago. They were legit and then got taken over by a duo or trio that are unscrupulous. I cannot recall all of the details.
Thanks for letting me know about this!
Yeah, off the top of my head Atmosphere and Driftwood do seem highly sus. They advertise ... a lot ... in in a way that seems very much about the $$$.
I wouldn't touch either of these lit mags with a ten-foot pole. Street Lit's website looks like a 1980s video game or a current online gambling site.
Always a good idea to check out the website before sending in work.
I always do. It sure saves a lot of wasted submissions!
You nailed it, Liz. I looked at SL's site a few days ago when the other article was published. No thanks. It was an immediate turn-off.
I was actually shocked at how bad the site is.
Not for me, but I guess some people like it...:)
Great description!
Thanks!
For my part anyway, a lit mag that emphasizes the money angle so much has a bad smell. Yes, it takes resources to run a project, but for a small independent journal (like mine), it's really not as much as some people make it out to be. It seems to me that some places are looking to cash in on people's hopes.
Of course, that's nothing new and we simply need to be vigilant and try to spot what's real and what looks like a milking farm.
Still, as you mention Becky, promotion is part of the process, but hopefully it can be done with a little finesse, which is why I will attempt to gently slip in a reminder that Dog Throat Journal (don't need to link, easy to google) is open for subs and a no fee contest with prizes that I'm personally funding because I want to find some lovely stories and kick the project up a couple of notches.
I look forward to the next part about web sites. I love it when lit mags publish online, at least part of the work so we can read it, but it's important to put thought and effort into the design, too. I cruise a lot of sites and I've seen good designs I'd like to maybe be a part of, and others that seem to be quickly hacked out.
Well, you're right-- for lit mags today, it has to be a labor of love for both writer and publisher/editor--alas! But then we're making magic--throwing a ball hard and fast is not magical, just muscle. But then lies always sell easier than truth.....
Hi. For what it's worth, Paris Review does received money from venture capital. Per this source--
https://www.causeiq.com/organizations/paris-review-foundation,134081729/--
Paris Review has assets over $11,000,000. Recent donors include the Silicon Valley Community Foundation, which was founded in 2006 with donations by multi-billionaires Mark Zuckerberg and Reed Hastings, among others. (Let's not forget also that the same publication notoriously was founded in 1950 with monies from the CIA, a fact which came out decades later.)
What would a Mark Zuckerberg gain from indirectly funding a literary magazine? Like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and a couple others, he's worth $200 billion-with-a-b. Money to burn. These guys are out to control every aspect of society-- see Peter Thiel, patron of J.D. Vance, and HIS involvement with the cultural world c/o Dimes Square and other trendy happenings.
Yeah, there are a lot of scamsters in every aspect of America at the moment. But some are small-time grifters, while others are very, very big players.
I suspect Paris Review is not funded *directly* by venture capitalists but rather by grants sponsored by the Silicon Valley Foundation. Just as lit mags were not funded *directly* by the CIA but rather it's cutout, The Congress for Cultural Freedom.
This distinction is important, I think, because grant applications require work. Regardless of who provides the funds, such journals are putting in at least a modicum of effort to obtain grant funding.
It seems misleading for Street Lit to say they're not funded by VC's, as though VC's are just throwing money at lit mags. Often some work is involved by these editors to obtain such funds. Street Lit is not incapable of doing such work, if they seek that funding.
Anyway, thanks for this info. It's all quite interesting!
I doubt Mark Zuckerberg has any interest in controlling the content of the Paris Review. It’s much more likely that he is a fan of the magazine, or he thinks it lends him some prestige to be a “supporter of the arts.”
I mentioned that it's an indirect investment. He probably doesn't know about the specific grant. More likely is that SVCF has a mission which includes investments in the arts, the second of your listed possibilities. I doubt seriously that Zuckerberg or Hastings themselves have ever read the magazine.
It very much though is about control. . .
I doubt anyone who wanted to control what Americans think would concern themselves with The Paris Review, which has a relatively tiny readership.
Amen Karl!
"Litmags" can be capitalised or not; to do so isn't a spelling error (I agree that it would be better as two words - though it would be better still as "literary magazines"). Worse, "no-one" isn't a spelling mistake, though it's more common in the U.K. (and Canada?) than in the U.S. In any case, if (genuine) errors of spelling and syntax indicated scams, then I'm sorry to say that nowadays there’d be few magazines (or authors) not tarred with that brush.
Spelling & syntax errors alone, I agree, do not indicate a scam. They are concerning, though, when an outlet is attempting to sell professional editing services. They also indicate lack of professionalism and attention to language, which we should expect from lit mags.
I disagree about the capitalization of "lit" in the sentence above!
Yes - I especially bridle when I see errors of syntax in adverts for copy-editing... (I think that capitalising "Literary" would probably be pompous, but not a spelling error.)
No-one is incorrect. Many eons ago, it was hyphenated. Then it became none. No one is fine. People are hyphenating all kinds of things that do not need it. Drives me nuts. When I taught grammar I had all 58 rules of hyphenation memorized. Not anymore, but I know what gets hyphenated and what does not. And, yes, I will die on this hill.
"... your book will be good enough ..." mixed reaction: acid reflux combined with hilarity. I'm glad scammers are so dumb, it helps to root them out. Also, for somebody peddling editing services, their writing is atrocious.
One would think that before settling down to create and publish a lit mag, people would curb their idealism and actually assess what the costs will be. And how much does it cost to maintain a website and online presence? Certainly not as must as the costs of printing a magazine, as was the practice in the Old Days Before the Internet. btw, I have occasionally edited novels and other types of manuscripts for writers. My fee is $100 an hour. My wife says that's too cheap.
I would think a business plan would be appropriate before opening the doors.
I also think I need to raise my developmental editing rates!
$100/hour is about right. I tend to start at $42 (half the rate I should really charge) ... for marketing work I do (as a freelancer), it's typically been $70+ (but I usually can only get this work through recruiters and they take 50%).
I'm curious---how long you think it would take you to edit 300 pp.? Surely not 65 hours... [as in the $6,500 fee Becky was quoted.]
If I wanted to earn money in the writing and publishing world, running a literary magazine would certainly not be my first choice. Editorial services and workshops would be better choices, and some lit mags appear to be offering them now in the wake of NEA cuts and other funding challenges. These new offerings (or maybe continued offerings) offer a value added to publishing contributor work.
Exactly.
I am often dazzled at the process such as it is. My strategy has always been twofold when deciding on litmags or publishing houses. I'm especially comfortable submitting to places where like minded authors have appeared. And then I look for publishers whose products I like to read.
My submissions often follow the trail of people I know and I also barter my being "first eyes" for someone's work in exchange for them looking my stuff over. It's worked so far I guess.
In any case I don't think I've ever submitted anywhere I haven't familiarized myself with first. So if a lit mag is new to me I'll get an issue or two to look over first before sending anything which, I suppose, is the time-honored old school way of doing things.
This all may be only subject-adjacent to the OP but something in me got triggered real hard when I saw the $6500 thing. Kind of blurred out all that came before. Jesus...
You're right man--and Jesus never charged us anything!
a word I often use myself...
About the Paris Review and "sponsorship": In fairness, let's remember that the CIA partly sponsored The Paris Review. Yes, indeed. Look it up.
I got sidetracked by your comment, "That is, 'No-one is holding a gun to your head.' Firstly, no one does not have a hyphen."
According to dictionary.com: In US English, "no one" is preferred, but "no-one" is also acceptable; in British English, it is "no-one."
Checking other dictionaries, we find: Merriam-Webster, "no one"; Collins, same as dictionay.com.
My understanding is that "no-one" (with hyphen) is rarely used, though it might be acceptable at times. "No one" is the common spelling. As I personally tripped up over reading it, use of the hyphenated version makes me question the editors' experience. But I appreciate you noting this! Were this the only abnormality in the letter, it would certainly be less concerning.
Both are a acceptable
I personally prefer "no-one" when referring to "not anyone." It is more explicit and clearer. "No one" I expect to be followed by a noun, as in, "In this situation, no one answer is correct."
As a far-from-young Brit, I can assure you that "no one" (without a hyphen) is the common usage in the UK and has been for as long as I can remember. N.B. There are few absolutes in English hyphenation and punctuation.
I agree with Lorraine that "no-one" (with hyphen) is very commonly used in British English and is considered correct there. When I was a philosophy student, I noticed this, and noticed too that some Anglophile American philosophers adopted this usage also.
Ah, okay.
"No-one" was the accepted usage where I grew up--New Zealand (British English)--and it is still the form that I use.
Look at it this way, at least they aren't talking about Peter Noone...
I believe his name is actually Peter No-One.
*** RE: StreetLit moaned: "Gradually, submissions decline…” BECKY TUCH wrote: "Uh, I’m sorry, what?" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . How do I scold thee, StreetLit? Let me count the ways (and address Becky's question, too). *** #!. Your subs have declined because writers wised up. On Submittable, your listing is categorized as "no fee" - - but there IS a fee because StreetLit is hoping to game the system. You also try to fool us by appearing DAILY on page 1 as "almost ready to close." *** #2. Your website design is atrocious & since March 5th there's been NO new content. *** #3. StreetLit inundates past submitters with fake come-hither ploys - - "We're closing soon but got few submissions. Why don't you send us something?" - - when StreetLit only wants more $$. *** #4. StreetLit offers paid feedback but delivers rudeness and sass. *** #5. Your domain registration on WhoIs was marked "private" instead of revealing that you are Dinu from Copenhagen, Sjælland. No one put a gun to your head to start StreetLit, did they, Dinu? Kindly reply!
YOU TELL 'EM,GIRL!!!
Thank you, Nolo! And let me mention that I've shared your wise saying - - "The M.F.A. Mafia" - - and everybody who's heard it agrees you deserve a listing in "Brainy Quotes." Much respect sent to you, my friend.
Apologies to the folks who receive income from "editing services" while at the same time editing lit mags (two words), but there is a conflict of interests there big enough to fit a semi with an extra trailer. Why do these editors think a writer would choose them over an editing service that specifically advertises itself as such and is not associated with a lit mag? No surprise here: because they think that editor will be so stunned by their work or bribed by their payment that their manuscript will be chosen for publication. Then it doesn't happen. Or, worse: it does happen. First, what kind of editing job would such conflicted editors do? Probably not great if they don't respect the author--and how could they respect someone who chose them under these circumstances. Second, what kind of press allows its editors to engage in this sort of thing? Probably one that does not intend to work very hard on behalf of the book. If someone legitimately wants to get detailed advice on revising a manuscript, they should (a) hire someone they respect (which can be for a variety of reasons) and/or (b) take a course that will help or matriculate in an MFA program that includes such a course. (I don't love MFA programs, but some probably offer good courses in this sort of thing.) The alternative that I prefer is for the author to ask smart friends to read the manuscript and make suggestions.
The rejection letter from Neon Origami absolutely screams ‘run like the wind.’ “With the right revisions, your book would be good enough that many publishers would be happy to accept it.” Nope. That’s a promise that cannot be made to a writer, ever. In the uncertain world of trade publishing, even experienced literary agents would be very unlikely to make such a promise. To dangle it in front of a hopeful author is both deceptive and cruel.
Becky, I want to thank you again on behalf of all of us poor but noble writers who gain so much from L.M.N. You are a protector at heart, the director of the Wordsmith FBI. There have always been thieves, but today they prey everywhere it seems , and now, even in the creative arts.
I again urge all fellow writers to not pay fees, for anything. And yes, the $250 would no doubt be for an AI generated editing, but that $6,500 fee seems really pricey too-- how many hours to read and edit 300 pages? Say 10 [at $650 per hour!!!] or stretch it to 20 hours, at $325 bucks/hour-- does it really take a pro two and a half days to edit a medium length MS?
Finally, how do you know an editor will improve the work, or maybe make it worse? I just got an email from one yesterday who completely misread a poem of mine, taking it quite literally--whatever happened to poetic license?