Anyone with magazine publishing experience?

[lin robinson]

Andromeda Spaceways, with 28 issues in print and all those eager writers chasing submission guidelines, still only manages about 100 unique visitors per day on average.

Damn! And I just wrote an article for Spaceways!

[lin robinson]

Will writers be more inclined to submit their stories if Tower of Light offers a small payment?

A Martian steps out of his lander in New York. A drunk approaches him and says, "Hey, buddy, can you give me a buck?"
The Martian scans his translator and says, "What's a buck?"
The drunk says, "You're right, make it a fiver."

So I gotta ask. Is it worth doing a poem for five bucks if it's not worth it for publication?

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by lin robinson

Everybody knows that some mags, especially startups don't pay at first (I have a note on that later) but online mags tend to draw more sneers for some reason, as if they weren't "real" publications. In fact, the work IS published. And it was selected.

I think it's important to point out that online "mags" especially seem to experience a lot of churn - so the actual credit-worthyness of such sites I would expect to be pretty negligable.

As with the publisher comments - anyone can set up a website and publish third-party material, which makes the entry-level for being published on such sites very low.

I think anyone who needs to succeed in any competitive industry will realise that giving work for free to low-entry/low-value sites isn't necessarily going to be a constructive use of time if it's not going to help breach actually competitive markets.

This is especially as lots of these sites appear to be run by aspiring writers, who appear to have little understanding of the publishing industry, let alone what is required as a publisher or editor.

2c.

[lin robinson]

Very true.

Which makes a different message to publishers than would be directed to writers.

For whom two salient things to keep in mind: The work IS published. If you find a paying online publisher later, your work is no longer virgin. It is also "registered" for copyright protection as long as it stays online.

A link to a story on a non-paying site has the same intrinsic value as a link to one on a paying site in this way: it's only as qood as the quality of the story.
The link comes "framed", rather than just pasted into your email. It beats having nothing to show.
There is an element of laziness implied by a publisher wanting to have another publisher "back his play" on selecting writers. The purer element would be to judge a sample on its own lights. But having it lit up a little by an attractive presentation can't hurt.
(Having it displayed in some stupid art design makes it less effective, of course. I had magazine clips I really liked but wouldn't show to new markets because the art direction had made them grotesque. And I'm not just talking about the disaster at Hustler, either.)

[Birol]

Originally Posted by lin robinson

For whom two salient things to keep in mind: The work IS published. If you find a paying online publisher later, your work is no longer virgin. It is also "registered" for copyright protection as long as it stays online.

The work itself will not be registered for copyright. The entire publication has a whole may or may not be registered through copyright, depending on what the owners of the publication have chosen to do. Many online publications do not register their completed issues; some do. However, they do not register the individual work, but the publication issue as a whole. Legally, these are different things.

Originally Posted by lin robinson

A link to a story on a non-paying site has the same intrinsic value as a link to one on a paying site in this way: it's only as qood as the quality of the story.

Disagree. The value of the clip is, in part, who has published it. A clip from Fantasy & Science Fiction Magazine beats a clip from Blade Blood & Thruster. This does not mean that a clip from BBT is not legitimate, but F&SF has a better reputation in the industry than BBT. It has existed longer, published better known authors, and is known for being more discerning in what it publishes.

[Wyrm Publishing]

The reputation of the publication and the people involved with it is fairly important. As has been pointed out, if you are looking to get into the SFWA, they have some pretty rigid guidelines for the magazines they'll consider acceptable for membership. The magazine has to qualify before you can.

That said, I know several respected zines that don't qualify. Electric Velocipede and Lady Churchill's Rosebud Wristlet are two that jump to mind. They are run by respected professionals and have proven themselves with years of experience and many printed issues. Very good stuff and they are respected by professional writers.

I publish Clarkesworld Magazine. It's an online magazine that publishes two stories each month. My background is in bookselling and technology. I have two editors. One is writer and the other a publisher. They bring a lot of experience to the publication and it is their strengths that have made it work. A good editor makes a world of difference. We also pay 10 cents a word, which is above average and helps put us higher on some peoples lists of places to submit to first. That said, one of the slots each month is solicited and the other is open submissions.

Our model is expensive. 8000 words of fiction per month for $800, plus other expenses. Our initial financial model was to draw traffic to my bookstore, donations, signed limited edition chapbooks of each issue, and an annual anthology. The bookstore closed, so now it's sending traffic to my publishing company. The first anthology comes out this October at the World Fantasy Convention.

Other higher paying online publications like Baen's Universe and Orson Scott Card's Intergalatic Medicine Show employ other financial models to pay their authors and artists. There is no set right way to do it. You do what you can for your staff and contributors and hope it works. Just be smart. Don't count on a single revenue stream or the generosity of others. Remember what happened with SciFiction. Great editor, award-winning stories, and the backing of the SciFi channel. When SciFi stopped paying, we lost one of best online magazines out there.

Good luck!

-Neil

[lin robinson]

Note the use of parentheses on "registered", please Birol. I don't know much about English law but understand it's similar to US law in that copyright does not need to be formally engaged. You own rights to your work upon creating them. However, you might end up need to prove it. In which case the inclusion somewhere online, with the attendant date available is pretty good proof.

I don't see any disagreement in your other comment. Naturally some clips carry more weight than others. I continue to maintain that having links to work is better than not having any and that if they are well presented, it helps.
It's funny that I've been characterized as an editor-hater here, because I tend to feel that most editors would look at such a clip and judge it for it's own worth and if they are insecure enough to require "legitimatization" from colleagues, they would tend to see an attractive, professional presentation of a piece as an indication that appealled to somebody who had some notion of what they were doing.

Interesting post, Wyrm. As I've said my experience was in print mags, and for all that the costs of online are attractive low, their ability to charge seems also a very tough game to win. I admire anybody who can make a publication pay out.

[Wyrm Publishing]

Originally Posted by lin robinson

Interesting post, Wyrm. As I've said my experience was in print mags, and for all that the costs of online are attractive low, their ability to charge seems also a very tough game to win. I admire anybody who can make a publication pay out.

Subscriptions are a tough nut to crack. We decided not to go that route and came up with a few alternatives instead. I feel that the future of magazines is online and it requires a different way of thinking than the traditional magazines we all think of initially. In my mind, subscriptions are part of the old way of thinking.

[lin robinson]

Absolutely. Just like selling copies of papers got blown out the window by free weeklies in the seventies (in the States, as all of my comments).

Actually, though when I said "charge" I was thinking "advertising" rather than subscription. Most new mags in the US fail from inability to collect for advertising. (Note I said "collect" not "sell") And it's my impression from the outside (and my experience in community websites) that ads are a fickle fish to fry online as well. Even with "pay per click" and such things offering advertisers the most qualified ads in history. (Or maybe because of that? :-)

One thing I think might transfer from print to web is my observation that the best, or at least easiest, way to make it with a mag is to have sponsorship or be an organ of some larger money-making entity. The largest category of mags in the states is car touring magazines, because they are all provided "free" as part of membership to regional American Automobile Associations. I worked for a big chain a friend started up on a dime: mags about university sports programs provided to season ticket holders, alumni assoc members, etc. He STARTED each publication with at least 20,000 paid subscribers to the first issue.

You mention a TV channel's sponsorship of an online site, and what happened when it evaporated. Bummer.

But I think it points a direction to startups: find a sugar-daddy. It can be done.

And at the top end of the creative spectrum, bend one's brains to what Wyrm is talking about: creating new models to fit new scenarios. These things can be done, and the people who do them become the next tier of heroes that everyone so admires and resents.

[Birol]

Originally Posted by lin robinson

Note the use of parentheses on "registered", please Birol. I don't know much about English law but understand it's similar to US law in that copyright does not need to be formally engaged. You own rights to your work upon creating them. However, you might end up need to prove it. In which case the inclusion somewhere online, with the attendant date available is pretty good proof.

Lin, you said that by being published, it was registered for copyright protection. Whether you used quotes or not to indicate some sly alternative meaning, that is what you said. Submitting something and being paid for it is not proof that you wrote it and it is not the same as registering something for copyright. Registering copyright is a specific legal process with specific benefits and ramifications.

[lin robinson]

Please don't use words like "sly" because you fail to take my meaning, okay? I think most people know what I mean, and certainly do after I spelled it out for you. If you don't understand, I'm sorry. But can't really help you any further.

[Wyrm Publishing]

Originally Posted by Birol

Registering copyright is a specific legal process with specific benefits and ramifications.

Yes, that's true, but US copyright law doesn't require registration to be granted the copyright. You gain some extra benefits by formal registration, but the majority of your rights are covered without it.

Registering the copyright doesn't necessarily mean you were the original author. It just means you had a copy on such and such a date. If someone has a copy that predates that, say published in a magazine or sold as a part of a product, that registered copyright is invalid. (I've seen this happen.) Unlike Patents, there is not an investigative process in registering.

Could be different outside the US. Always best to check locally to see if there are any extra concerns to be had.

-Neil

[Birol]

Originally Posted by Wyrm Publishing

Yes, that's true, but US copyright law doesn't require registration to be granted the copyright. You gain some extra benefits by formal registration, but the majority of your rights are covered without it.

Right. Most of the benefits are in the form of what restitution you can claim for violated copyright. Personally, I would never register my own copyright. No reason for it, but I felt Lin was misleading any newer writers reading about how to register a copyright and wanted to clarify that there is a formal process and that being published does not substitute for it. Also, if a publication register its copyright for an issue, that only covers the publication as a whole, not individual pieces published in it.

[lin robinson]

One more note on this: as has been said, copyright is owned upon creation automatically, proving it is another matter, and there are formal ways to register. A very common one, especially with screenplays, is the Writer's Guild of America electronic registration. Costs about $20 USD Writers Guild of America, West

The Big Enchilada is the US copyright office itself at http://www.copyright.gov/register/
A peculiarity of this which most writers are not unfortunate enough to find out is that registration there, which costs more, is time-consuming, and a burro-cratic pain in the butt, is the pretty much required to bring a lawsuit.

Does this mean that that you should register everything just in case. Not really. If your are infringed you can register when you bring suit. (Often just filing...or even a letter from a lawyer... will bring a settlement without the eventuality of court)
When you go to court you really need to prove two things: that you created the piece before these scumbags got their hands on it, and that they have not contract granting them use. The latter ball is in their court, of course, but if you didn't go through the registration you need to show prior claim. THe old "send yourself a registered letter" gambit is often cited. But having the thing listed on WGA, or published elsewhere is pretty hard to get around.

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by Birol

Lin, you said that by being published, it was registered for copyright protection. Whether you used quotes or not to indicate some sly alternative meaning, that is what you said. Submitting something and being paid for it is not proof that you wrote it and it is not the same as registering something for copyright. Registering copyright is a specific legal process with specific benefits and ramifications.

Indeed, publication isn't proof that you wrote it - but in the UK at least copyright protection is automatically confered and I believe the US now follows suits after you used to have to file at the Library of Congress (I think it was).

So I think Lin's point is that if you submit to a free publication, you've effectively used up your electronic publishing rights - which could make it very hard indeed to have the piece accepted for a paying publication.

I think the confusion is one of copyight vs distributing rights.

2c.