is less of a "philosophy" and more of a statement of our
perspective on the literary marketplace and an explanation of the factors
that led to and shaped the development of Ecostamps.
It's long. Look at the scroll bar. LONG!
But if you are interested in understanding
the ideas and concepts underpinning Ecostamps,
and you want it in an unpolished, plain-spoken
manner that's a quick read despite the length,
this is where you'll find it.
If you have any questions about what follows, please contact us at info@ecostamps.org.
We believe the future of literature fundamentally depends
on a shared commitment between editors and authors:
Editors support the work of authors; authors support the work of editors.
Great concept, isn't it?
Editors and authors
working hand-in-hand to carry on the noble tradition of literature.
Unfortunately, the concept too often fails in the translation to reality.
While many factors contribute to this breakdown, one of the
most significant is a submission
process that is hopelessly inefficient.
Postal submissions burden editors with administrative
chores that do not contribute to the excellence of
the market or the development of writers.
They also divert resources to the U.S. Postal Service
rather than capture those dollars and put them to work to
benefit writers.
Email submissions?
Before addressing email submissions, it is important
to underscore a few other observations.
Very few writers provide financial
support to the markets
they hope will publish their work.
They don't buy subscriptions.
They don't buy single issues.
They don't make donations.
Most authors also astutely employ a shotgun approach with markets that accept email submissions.
They submit far and wide, high and low
in the hope that some editor somewhere will accept their work.
A writer's objective is publication.
Given that,
spending more than 3 seconds finding the perfect market
to submit a story or poem to when
it is as easy to submit to 183 markets as 1 is counterproductive and irrational.
Markets that accept email submissions actively encourage
this shotgun approach.
Email submissions not only eliminate the incentive
writers have to learn about a market, they penalize
writers who are self-selective with their submissions.
How?
The job market circa 2002 provides some interesting insight
into how email submissions have changed the literary marketplace.
Two decades ago, when a job was advertised in a local newspaper, perhaps 20
applicants mailed resumes to HR, and the
likelihood the company could easily identify the most qualified
candidates to interview was excellent.
When companies started posting positions on job boards like
Monster.com and began accepting resumes by email, they let the genie
out of the bottle.
In an effort to tap a deep and wider pool of applicants, companies opened the flood gates.
Rather than 20 resumes, they received 2,000, most from
unqualified applicants who realized (rightly so) that
it cost nothing to submit a resume by email.
Email applications, like email submissions, are a zero-cost option.
Given job seekers' objective, to submit anywhere other than everywhere
was irrational. Click the button to send the resume and let HR personnel determine
if there's an appropriate match.
This deluge had two significant negative consequences.
The cost of screening applicants
increased exponentially, and the likelihood companies could identify the
2 or 3 most qualified candidates out of 2,000+ resumes received became
proportionally smaller.
That's bad for companies and very bad for highly qualified candidates.
Companies are now attempting to put the genie back in the bottle
without sacrificing the administrative efficiencies offered by technology.
By re-erecting nominal barriers, often by employing a company-specific resume
submission form, they hope to weed out the least serious candidates, those
who are unwilling to spend 30 minutes to apply for the position.
While the disincentive to self-selection is one of the most
significant negatives of email submissions, it's not the only one.
Spam, viruses, system crashes, lost submissions,
and status queries hardly qualify email as even a mediocre submission
management system. Outlook, Gmail, and other email clients were not built as
submission management tools, so it's not surprising they are fundamentally inadequate for the task.
Email has also altered the editor-author relationship from one of shared commitment
and responsibility to
one in which
editors assume 100% of the costs and writers expect 100% of the benefit.
Not only do writers expect to be able to submit a story with
a click of a button to 183
markets, they expect 183 editors to
carefully read the submission, provide thoughtful and substantive feedback,
and dig into their pockets to pay them when
their stories are published.
Email has also fostered the notion now common among writers that
somehow a "postage" fee for online submissions is wicked and nefarious and a sure
sign that a market is run by a bunch of thieving scam artists.
Not to dwell on this point unnecessarily,
especially given that Ecostamps empowers writers
and lets them determine whether to submit for free
or to pay a nominal fee for enhanced features,
but it is worthwhile to consider the following:
A fee for a service isn't the problem.
The question is whether the service
offers at least as much value as the fee.
As long as the Enhanced service is an option
rather than a requirement, there is no right or wrong answer to the issue,
merely statements of preference.
Ecostamps is a common sense solution that provides the tools
and creates the incentives that foster a shared commitment
between editors and authors.
Through Enhanced submissions,
the Writer Fellowship and Literary Market Grant,
and a suite of submission and review tools, Ecostamps provides
editors and writers incentives to work together to advance
their individual and collective objectives and expand the world
of readers.
It's not hocus-pocus or, frankly, rocket science.
To provide feedback, editors need more time.
Ecostamps doesn't add hours to the day; it eliminates time
wasted on spam, viruses, system crashes, mailbags, and status queries.
Editors are also more likely to provide feedback if they have an incentive.
Ecostamps Assessments enable
editors to provide substantive feedback with a few clicks of a mouse.
Each completed Assessment earns the market $1.
We know it's not much, but we also know it's better than $0 and can
provide much needed funds to cover operating costs and create a pool
of funds to pay authors who support the market and whose
work is accepted for publication.
Enhanced submissions signal to editors writers' commitment
to the development of their craft and to the markets they hope
will publish their work.
An Enhanced submission costs about the same as a latte,
a pint of Dogfish Head Ale, an issue of People magazine,
or a pound of heirloom tomatoes.
What do writers receive for $4?
Ecostamps also offers writers a Basic submission option.
Basic submissions are FREE and offer
instantaneous and guaranteed delivery; however, like email
submissions, they cannot be edited,
and editorial feedback is limited to accept and reject.
Basic submissions require no more commitment on the part
of writers than a click of a button.
In the spirit of shared commitment, Ecostamps
tailors editors' commitment on Basic submissions to
a reciprocal click of a button.
Writers who opt for Ecostamps Enhanced submissions, just like those
who become ESPN Insiders
or pay to access the The New York Times Crossword,
pay a small fee and receive premium service.
While we encourage editors to view Assessment dollars
as an ante and create a pool of funds
to pay authors who support their market and whose
work is accepted for publication, they are under no
obligation to do so.
Through Enhanced submissions every market can
be a paying market.
That power lies in the hands of writers.
Ecostamps gives writers and editors an option.
As mundane as it may sound, we believe options are good.
Unlike other groups that promise the world and deliver
disappointingly less, we offer nothing more than a
commitment to seek methods and develop tools that
foster collaboration between editors and authors
and advance each group's collective
and individual objectives.
We will not spend dollars on marketing that can otherwise
be used to create scholarships to community writers workshops
or to fund literacy programs.
We will not only listen to editors and authors,
we will actively seek their input so each iteration
of Ecostamps will better meet their needs.
Finally, Ecostamps will only exist as long as there is
a need for the service and a willingness on the part of
authors and editors to support our efforts.
Ecostamps enables the shared commitment between editors and authors.
Ecostamps is also a shared commitment: Us to editors and authors,
editors and authors to us.
Thoughts, questions, comments, suggestions, rants?
Contact us at info@ecostamps.org.
|
