Is there a difference between a cover letter for a snail mail submission and an electronic (online) submission? Is there a model someone can show me? Also, if a journal does not ask for/require it (Glimmer Train does not), do you still send a one? Thank you.
Electronic (Online) Submissions
- Thread starter macandal
- Start date
- Status
I always send a cover letter. As far as the content is concerned, I don't make any distinctions between online and snail mail cover letters. The only thing I do differently is I don't bother with the address header above the salutation.
johnnysannie
Banned
Glimmer Train's submission system doesn't allow for a cover letter even if a writer wished to include one. Neither do similar submission systems at many online journals and mags.
For those that do, I include a brief letter unless it's so noted in the guidelines that editors don't want to see one.
For those that do, I include a brief letter unless it's so noted in the guidelines that editors don't want to see one.
Actually, I just checked their submission site and they do allow a short "cover letter" space, if it is up to 250.
Thanks for all your comments.
The Missouri Review accepts online submissions. They charge $3 dollars to cover the costs involved in such submissions. They still accept snail mail. Do you think one can have more of a shot if you send it one way over another? I don't really know what made me think this but I figured I'd ask. See all about their policy here:
http://www.missourireview.org/esubmissions.php
Thanks.
http://www.missourireview.org/esubmissions.php
Thanks.
Never mind. I just read where it says that one's chances are the same whether one submits via snail mail or on-line.
macandal said:
Charging for submissions is a racket. When a magazine has to cover costs by charging writers money, that magazine should not exist.
However, the Missouri Review is one of the ten or twenty most important literary journals in the country.
That being said, I think charging money (they only charge for online subs) is lame, considering the number of other quality journals who accept online subs and don't charge (StoryQuarterly, Glimmer Train, Kenyon Review, etc.). If you don't want to pay the three dollars to them, send it by mail (though that will cost you in copying and postage, of course).
That being said, I think charging money (they only charge for online subs) is lame, considering the number of other quality journals who accept online subs and don't charge (StoryQuarterly, Glimmer Train, Kenyon Review, etc.). If you don't want to pay the three dollars to them, send it by mail (though that will cost you in copying and postage, of course).
That's what I figured. Sure, it may be a racket (and Glimmer Train--not charging for on-line submissions--proves it) but the Missouri Review is, as mentioned before, one of the best/most important journals in the country and it was convenient and not too expensive. So, I bit the proverbial bullet. It's pretty easy to submit this way. I'll be submitting to Glimmer Train so I'll let you guys know how it compares to Miss Review.
johnnysannie
Banned
The Missouri Review is not charging for submissions but for the cost of printing the submission etc. Therefore, it's not a racket. As has been mentioned, The Missouri Review is a well respected, well-known publication. Based at the University of Missouri at Columbia, MU also has a long standing reputation as an excellent school for journalists and writers.
It costs $3 to print? It's a rip-off, whether intentionally or otherwise.
On submission letters/emails: please, never attempt to justify or explain your story in your cover letter. If the story needs justification or explanation, it'll get rejected anyway.
And when/if you get rejected, take it and move on. Please, never lower yourself to whining at the editors. Be professional. Move on. There's more markets than you have stories for.
On submission letters/emails: please, never attempt to justify or explain your story in your cover letter. If the story needs justification or explanation, it'll get rejected anyway.
And when/if you get rejected, take it and move on. Please, never lower yourself to whining at the editors. Be professional. Move on. There's more markets than you have stories for.
johnnysannie
Banned
I have to disagree - once more - that Missouri Review charging $3 is a ripoff. It's not.
What is a major ripoff, however, are the increasing numbers of magazines online and traditional that charge submission fees. I've run across several - and don't waste my time with these.
I'd rather pay $3 to pay for the the cost of printing a story than $15, $20, or $30 for "contest" entries sponsored by many reputable literary magazines.
What is a major ripoff, however, are the increasing numbers of magazines online and traditional that charge submission fees. I've run across several - and don't waste my time with these.
I'd rather pay $3 to pay for the the cost of printing a story than $15, $20, or $30 for "contest" entries sponsored by many reputable literary magazines.
johnnysannie
Banned
Sorry, James, I still disagree. The charge is not to submit but for processing - reasonable enough with the rising costs of paper and ink. And it's only charged for those who choose to submit via e-mail - NOT for those who choose to mail their submissions in the standard fashion. Thus, I don't see it as a rip off because it is possible to submit without the charge. I have already seen increasing numbers of magazines - some very well known - who charge a submission or reading fee that exceeds a measly $3.
Missouriu
Nonsense. There isn't a magazine in existence that doesn't have the same cost for printing a story, and that cost is NOT three dollars, or anywhere near it. It it's costing them more than about forty cents, tops, to print a story, someone is stealing from them.
I know the reputation the Missouri Review has, and they are still stealing your money. A good reputation nevers justifies charging writers.
It's a racket, a way for the magazine to make money it can't make from sales. "A fool and his money are soon parted" really applies here.
johnnysannie said:
Nonsense. There isn't a magazine in existence that doesn't have the same cost for printing a story, and that cost is NOT three dollars, or anywhere near it. It it's costing them more than about forty cents, tops, to print a story, someone is stealing from them.
I know the reputation the Missouri Review has, and they are still stealing your money. A good reputation nevers justifies charging writers.
It's a racket, a way for the magazine to make money it can't make from sales. "A fool and his money are soon parted" really applies here.
However you dress it up - submission fee, reading fee, printing, admin, tea and cake for the reader fee, it's a rip off.
At NFG we recieved - and read - almost 15,000 submissions in two years. No one penny was charged for this. And every writer got paid on acceptance.
NFG has sadly now gone to the wall. Charging a reading fee was mooted, to keep the magazine going, but EIC Shar O'Brien chose the path of integrity and folded rather than rip writers off.
At NFG we recieved - and read - almost 15,000 submissions in two years. No one penny was charged for this. And every writer got paid on acceptance.
NFG has sadly now gone to the wall. Charging a reading fee was mooted, to keep the magazine going, but EIC Shar O'Brien chose the path of integrity and folded rather than rip writers off.
johnnysannie
Banned
Well, dears, I'll agree to disagree and leave it there.
But I would still rather have a publication credit from The Missouri Review than from numerous other journals. My short fiction has appeared in several university literary journals but not within The Missouri Review. I'd hazard a guess that neither James nor Mike have seen their work there either!
But I would still rather have a publication credit from The Missouri Review than from numerous other journals. My short fiction has appeared in several university literary journals but not within The Missouri Review. I'd hazard a guess that neither James nor Mike have seen their work there either!
You can hazard whatever guesses you wish. I've had a piece published in one University Literary Journal, and numerous other publications. Whether or not Missouri would publish my work is moot - they'll never read it. Magazines pay me, not vice versa.
I would also suspect that James is probably far more widely published than either of us.
I would also suspect that James is probably far more widely published than either of us.
johnnysannie said:Well, dears, I'll agree to disagree and leave it there.
But I would still rather have a publication credit from The Missouri Review than from numerous other journals. My short fiction has appeared in several university literary journals but not within The Missouri Review. I'd hazard a guess that neither James nor Mike have seen their work there either!
My short work has appearded in nearly 100 magazines, all of which paid me, none of which I paid. So, no, I haven't seen my work in Missouri Review, and I won't. No one will ever see my work there because I will not submit my work to anyone who charges me money for someting they're supposed to be wanting and needing. Writers do not pay journals, journals pay writers. Period. Writers especially do not pay journals six to ten times as much to print a story as it actually costs.
johnnysannie
Banned
James
You seem to over and over miss the point. You also seem to take the issue very personally which it is not.
This is not a discussion of whether or not your work will appear within the august pages of The Missouri Review (or if it even should) but about the fact that $3 to process and print online submissions is far from unreasonable. It's not a submission fee and anyone who doesn't want to part with the $3 can get in their car, burn $6 worth of gasoline to drive to the post office and pay postage on the submission and SASE. The value of $3 is rather diminished these days and for me, it would probably cost at least $6 (just over 2 gallons of gas) to drive to town and back to drop my sub in the mail.
Contest fees from many major literary journals are much higher - $15 being the bottom end that I've seen recently and $35 being the top. For those much higher fees, writers may sometimes get a subscription to the journal (but not always) and one shot at an acceptance.
Anyone who might want to judge for themselves can go here:
http://www.missourireview.com/blog/archives/000191.php
If James is waiting for me to say "Oh, you are so right" and that I am so misguided, it won't happen....not in this case. We have a difference in opinion and in fairness, anyone following this thread deserves to have it from the proverbial horse's mouth which is The Missouri Review.
You seem to over and over miss the point. You also seem to take the issue very personally which it is not.
This is not a discussion of whether or not your work will appear within the august pages of The Missouri Review (or if it even should) but about the fact that $3 to process and print online submissions is far from unreasonable. It's not a submission fee and anyone who doesn't want to part with the $3 can get in their car, burn $6 worth of gasoline to drive to the post office and pay postage on the submission and SASE. The value of $3 is rather diminished these days and for me, it would probably cost at least $6 (just over 2 gallons of gas) to drive to town and back to drop my sub in the mail.
Contest fees from many major literary journals are much higher - $15 being the bottom end that I've seen recently and $35 being the top. For those much higher fees, writers may sometimes get a subscription to the journal (but not always) and one shot at an acceptance.
Anyone who might want to judge for themselves can go here:
http://www.missourireview.com/blog/archives/000191.php
If James is waiting for me to say "Oh, you are so right" and that I am so misguided, it won't happen....not in this case. We have a difference in opinion and in fairness, anyone following this thread deserves to have it from the proverbial horse's mouth which is The Missouri Review.
I think actually it's you who's missing the point. Some of us DO think $3 is unreasonable.
Missouri says "The fee for online submissions made from within the U.S. is $3 to cover the cost of processing and printing out your manuscript. "
What exactly constitutes 'processing'? And the actual cost of printing? This does not 'cover the cost', this is profiteering.
And comparing this fee to contest entrance fees is erroneous. They are two different things.
James has me beat by about 4:1, but either way, we can both submit to plenty of publications who don't charge.
Missouri says "The fee for online submissions made from within the U.S. is $3 to cover the cost of processing and printing out your manuscript. "
What exactly constitutes 'processing'? And the actual cost of printing? This does not 'cover the cost', this is profiteering.
And comparing this fee to contest entrance fees is erroneous. They are two different things.
James has me beat by about 4:1, but either way, we can both submit to plenty of publications who don't charge.
Last edited:
Cost
Three cents is unreasonable. Three tenths of one percent is unreasonable. Three one millionths of one cent is completely unreasonable.
Contests are a different matter, but in about 99% of all contests, the fee there is a ripoff, as well. Darned few contests mean anything to a writer. Most are completely worthless, and nothing more than a way for some group to raise money.
The few good contests that charge fees have reasons for doing so. They actually hire qualified outside readers, they give away big prizes and big money, etc. The Missouri Review doesn't do a darned thing that thousands of other magazines don't do for free.
I don't care whether you say I'm right or not. If you want to pay someone to print and read your manuscript, go ahead. It's your money. But I'm a writer. People pay me.
Three cents is unreasonable. Three tenths of one percent is unreasonable. Three one millionths of one cent is completely unreasonable.
Contests are a different matter, but in about 99% of all contests, the fee there is a ripoff, as well. Darned few contests mean anything to a writer. Most are completely worthless, and nothing more than a way for some group to raise money.
The few good contests that charge fees have reasons for doing so. They actually hire qualified outside readers, they give away big prizes and big money, etc. The Missouri Review doesn't do a darned thing that thousands of other magazines don't do for free.
I don't care whether you say I'm right or not. If you want to pay someone to print and read your manuscript, go ahead. It's your money. But I'm a writer. People pay me.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 701
- Reaction score
- 130
- Location
- Bolingbrook, IL
- Website
- www.idiorhythmic.net
I'm confused (not for the first time).
If it costs them money to print out manuscripts submitted electronically then I would think the most reasonable choice would be to not accept electronic submissions.
And they only charge for submissions made from within the US? Do submissions coming from outside of the country not cost them anything to print out?
Of course I read all of my submissions on my tablet pc or on my PDA. What's the point of accepting e-subs if you're going to go through the bother of printing them out...saving a tree and all that, you know.
If it costs them money to print out manuscripts submitted electronically then I would think the most reasonable choice would be to not accept electronic submissions.
And they only charge for submissions made from within the US? Do submissions coming from outside of the country not cost them anything to print out?
Of course I read all of my submissions on my tablet pc or on my PDA. What's the point of accepting e-subs if you're going to go through the bother of printing them out...saving a tree and all that, you know.
Okay, okay. Now, now, boys and girls, behave. I started this thread so let me say this. Call it what you wish, the Missouri Review charges for online submissions. Some will submit this way, some won't. I decided to pay and submitted my story this way because it was convenient. I wouldn't go so far as to call this a scam but, come on, let's call it what it is, they are charging for online submissions and offering a lame excuse to go with it when places like Glimmer Train don't charge you for this (they do, however, charge if you submit your story to one of their contests). That said, I submitted my story to the Missouri Review on 9/28 and they responded today, 10/7, by saying thanks but no thanks. Oh well. I still haven't heard from Glimmer Train (submitted on 10/1).
Now, can we all get along?
Now, can we all get along?
- Status