Should Facebook posts count as "previously published"?
"Editors collect work for their magazines because they love it..."
Welcome to our weekend conversation!
A question came from a reader. R. writes,
I have been seeking a proper response to the issue of internet literary postings not vetted by another human, such as on Facebook. It may meet some definitions of publishing, but it is far from equal to journals vetted by editors.
I recently asked a journal if it regarded Facebook postings as “previously published” per their submission guidelines. The editor replied: “As Facebook posts are indexed by Google, we do consider it publishing.”
And I replied with this: “Indexing is not the same as editing, and what all literature needs and benefits from before being published is good editing. Lit mags provide it. Google and Facebook do not. You are treating them as if their selection criteria - essentially non-existent - were similar to yours, when clearly it is not.”
Another point: The most important task for an editor is to determine whether a submission is suitable for their publication. This happens with every piece submitted. In Facebook, it is the writer who makes that determination. By treating the writer as having the same objectivity and editorial skill as theirself, the editor does a disservice to their own publication, to the writer, and to literature.
This question is full of interesting parts, so let’s dig in.
Firstly, should editors consider work that’s posted to Facebook “previously published”? I’m sort of fascinated with this question as I can see different answers from various angles.