Judges published in lit mag=self publishing?

[The Lonely One]

I'm not going to mention this college lit mag by name, but I will say it is a low-caliber mag so far as quality goes. On all levels--fiction, poetry, photography, all of it is fairly mediocre. This particular mag has really made me disbelieve the notion that "online" pubs are worse than "print" pubs just by nature.

Anyways, I sent in and was rejected several years ago--I wasn't particularly heartbroken or anything; I sent the work in on the last day to submit and it was slightly over the length limit.

But their rejection letter is what got me. Paraphrasing, it said they were sorry, but that there were a large amount of submissions and the rejection wasn't a reflection on my work.

Most of the time, I'd chalk it up as "yeah right, of course it was a reflection on my work. They're just being polite and this needs more polishing."

But in this particular magazine, the (student) judges who decide which works go into the pub also published various stories, poems and pictures in the pub.

So, isn't that essentially self-publishing, and also an ethical issue? I can't see how it isn't, but maybe I'm looking at it wrong. If there're so many submissions why take up valuable space with your own writing? Shouldn't you either be a judge or a submitting artist, not both? What do you think?

[blacbird]

This kind of crap happens all the time in litmags, most of which have some association with an academic institution, and therefore represent an avenue for the local literati in-crowd and those connected to it. It happens in many lit contests, as well; I went to a major writers' conference some years ago which had a contest associated with it. The "winners", announced at an assembly on the last day, were all locals. The best contests are those blindly-judged ones where the mode of submission ensures that the judges don't know the authors' names when they read submissions. The Pacific Northwest Conference and Contests are a good example of this procedure. But I know of no literary mag that follows such a practice.

caw

[spike]

I'm not going to mention this college lit mag by name, but I will say it is a low-caliber mag so far as quality goes. On all levels--fiction, poetry, photography, all of it is fairly mediocre. This particular mag has really made me disbelieve the notion that "online" pubs are worse than "print" pubs just by nature.

Anyways, I sent in and was rejected several years ago--I wasn't particularly heartbroken or anything; I sent the work in on the last day to submit and it was slightly over the length limit.

But their rejection letter is what got me. Paraphrasing, it said they were sorry, but that there were a large amount of submissions and the rejection wasn't a reflection on my work.

Most of the time, I'd chalk it up as "yeah right, of course it was a reflection on my work. They're just being polite and this needs more polishing."

But in this particular magazine, the (student) judges who decide which works go into the pub also published various stories, poems and pictures in the pub.

So, isn't that essentially self-publishing, and also an ethical issue? I can't see how it isn't, but maybe I'm looking at it wrong. If there're so many submissions why take up valuable space with your own writing? Shouldn't you either be a judge or a submitting artist, not both? What do you think?

Playing devil's advocate. Perhaps that was the students compensation for judging?

[dgiharris]

Yeah,

pretty shady.

Mel...

[Wayne K]

So all I need to do to get published is buy a magazine. I can see someone doing that.

[The Lonely One]

Playing devil's advocate. Perhaps that was the students compensation for judging?

That could be, but it's a crappy compensation if you ask me--your work published with no checks and balances for quality, thus bringing down the status of the whole mag and lowering the bar for everyone (including themselves, which hurts them more than they initially know).

Still just my opinion, but I would decline that offer if I were a judge.

[veinglory]

The way around it is to have submission sent without names, and other judges receive the work. Of course it still leads to "group think" about what is good writing and some selection bias--but it does reduce the problem somewhat.