Two Sentences From A Medium Curator Gave Me A Basis For "Good" Writing
Changed how I look at being a nominator, editor and a writer. Hope it's helpful.
I want to dive into a loaded topic. One of my readers mentioned that the Boost Nomination Pilot is great for writers who get boosted but less so for those who don’t. That’s a very valid point and I don’t want to ignore it. But there’s a mistake a lot of writers make and it causes a lot of hurt feelings so I want to talk about it.
Here’s what a lot of writers think. They think if they’re not getting boosted, it means their writing isn’t “good enough” according to someone else. And you know what? I get that feeling. No one is a stranger to the feeling of rejection and it sucks.
Here’s another thing writers tell me. They used to get curated or distributed under the ‘old’ system so they know their writing is ‘good’ but it’s not getting boosted. And they honest to goodness do not understand why. Same thing. Feeling rejected sucks.
I’ve been a nominator for over a year. First month I was a nominator I got the shock of my life. What happened to me happens to most new nominators. They submit what they think is a good story, only to have it declined. And it happens over and over. It’s not uncommon for new nominators to have a 50% rejection rate their first month or two. Know what happens when every other story you submit gets declined? Makes you question yourself. Wonder if you even know what the h— good writing is.
Last summer, the program was still pretty new and so many nominators were so frustrated that Medium made a generous offer. For a 30 day period, they gave each nominator two opportunities to ask the curators to explain why a story was declined. I think it was last August, but the month doesn’t matter. For one month, we each had two golden tickets to ask. Why. Why was this declined?
Some people thought that should always be an option, but that’s not tenable. Not humanly possible. Think about the numbers. We currently have 150 or so nominators. Sending anywhere from 20-80 nominations to the curators. Simple math says not possible. Not enough hours in the day to read all those stories, plus send hundreds of email explaining why nominations got declined. Made those two golden tickets real precious.
I had submitted a piece from History of Women. It was so well written and engaging I was dead sure they’d boost. When I got the decline I was floored. So I used one of my golden tickets. Wrote back and said can you please explain why this was declined?
The reply was two sentences.
So you know, I’m paraphrasing. Because I don’t share anyone’s words verbatim without their permission because that’s not cool. And because the curators do not use their names in replies so I wouldn’t know who to ask. And in case you think they should use their names, no they shouldn’t. Because they are all humans like you and me and they don’t need disgruntled writers piling on them in public on their posts, because you know that would happen. So. Onward. Here’s me paraphrasing…
Basically the curator said the post was declined because anyone with access to the internet and a bit of writing chops could have written it. Said they are looking for the kind of story that literally no one else could have written but that writer.
Made me stop and go huh. Sat and just stared at that.
At first I was a bit grumpy that the reply wasn’t longer. I used one of my golden tickets and got two sentences? lol. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized those two sentences were all I needed. Said everything I needed to know. Concise leaves less room for confusion. Good writing tip, too, by the way.
Here’s what most writers truly cannot wrap their heads around for months, if at all. The curators read thousands of stories. Not just any stories. The stories that dozens of editors said here, this is the best in my pub today. All day. Every day. Reading those top stories hand picked by editors. I’m looking at the dirt in my backyard. They have a long view from up in space. From up in the stars. That we don’t have.
Turned me into a bit of a bear at my pubs. Telling my writers bring me something no one else can. Add some *you* to this. Especially book reviews and history. Real easy to toss those off and not add anything personal, not make it “their” story.
Now I say you want me to nominate a book review, bring me something I can’t see on Amazon or Good Reads. You want me to nominate a History of Women post, bring me something I can’t find at History.com or Wikipedia. Bring me some you, in there.
But it wasn’t just my publications. Made me look at all writing through different eyes. Think about all the stuff going up everywhere you look. Medium, Substack, LinkedIn, everywhere. How to this, how to that, informational posts, political rants.
A lot of that stuff? It’s content.
To me, that curator defined content vs. writing.
If anyone could have written it, it’s content. Just more pixels on the internet. And that’s fine. People get to write what they want to write. Sometimes what they need to write. But with a million writers on board? Writers have to level up. Me included.
Let’s go back to that writer of mine who got declined. Was it good writing. Darn straight it was. No question at all. But anyone could have written it. There was nothing to make me say no one but her could have written this. How many pieces of work do we need that anyone could have written?
And I can hear some of you. Thinking yeah, that’s about non fiction. Well hold your britches, because I’m going deeper. Easy to apply that to a historical piece or book review. It’s just Wikipedia or Good Reads made more interesting. But if you sit and think on it, it’s more than prettying up facts.
You can apply the same to personal essays. Kids misbehave, we argue with family, fight with spouses, get divorced. Our parents get old, get dementia, or die too fast or too slow. What makes your piece stand out from five thousand others about the very same thing. What’s the angle you take that says THIS one is worth the reading.
Not even done yet.
So, as a writer, you write a story five thousand people have written. Except then you give it a weak title. And it’s good, but it starts kind of slow. You see what I’m saying here? You want the curators to say yes, this shines. Stands a foot above the others and when they don’t, you think they’re saying it’s not “good.” They’re not saying that at all. Most likely, your writing is just fine.
Now I’ll tell you about my second golden ticket. It was also two sentences. Had to laugh, wonder if I got the same curator twice. But this one? It was even shorter. It said something to the effect of this is not bad writing. It’s just that it’s average.
***
Some of the best things in life have a way of coming around full circle. Because in those golden days when so many pieces got distributed there was a different thing writers were complaining about. Not earning enough. Yay, happy to get distributed, now pay me!! lol. Because we humans never run out of what to complain about.
Medium has over a million members now. More members means more money in the pay pot. But it also means more competition. And more competition means we writers need to level up.
Lots of writers don’t care. Maybe you don’t care. And that’s okay. But if you do care? Then you need to ask yourself better questions.
Is this compelling, is the opening strong, does it evoke a reaction in the reader or does it just dump your emotions? Does the title whet the appetite without being over the top clickbaity? Is the pace strong, the formatting easy on the eyes?
Is this something only you could have written?
Is this among the top writing in the publication you’re submitting to and if not is there a publication that’s a better fit for your writing style?
Those are the questions to ask. Not whether you are being rejected and why.
Can’t speak for anyone else, but I can’t not write. Like Kafka said, a non writing writer is a monster courting insanity. I have to write, so I might as well hone my craft is the way I think. Steve Martin wrote a book called “be so good they can’t ignore you.” It’s good advice no matter what we do.
And to which ever curator sent me that two sentence reply — thank you. Made a world of difference to me. As an editor, a nominator and as a writer.
Love to know what you think.
Goldmine of truth people won’t want to hear but I don’t give a damn about what people want to hear. I’m glad you wrote it. Said it. Delivered it in a professional manner. Good is not the same as standout. Standout gets big paydays. You want money for bland content go somewhere else.
Those curators gave you a gift! I know I sound like a broken record, playing the same groove every Friday, but I think it's worth repeating; before hitting submit, every writer oughta be asking themselves 2 questions:
1. Could anyone else have written this the way I just have?
2. If I saw this on a newsstand, would I stop to check it out?
For those writers that feel they're being left in the dust, I'd say if the answer to both of those is "yes," then the next step is to find some participating pubs to showcase your work (for those that might not know, one of the Boost program mandates is to find/surface emerging talent). Self-published work is as eligible as anything, but it's playing the game on Hard Mode. If nothing else, you'll get some new eyeballs on your work.