Everything About Submitting Short Stories | cover letters, submission strategy, rejection

Short story publication is less about secret tactics and more about disciplined process: use the standard submission pipeline, follow each magazine’s guidelines to the letter, and treat rejection as expected feedback rather than a verdict. The biggest practical takeaway is that most outlets now route submissions through Submitable, and the fastest way to avoid self-sabotage is to submit clean, correctly formatted work with a cover letter that matches the magazine’s expectations.

Most magazines rely on Submitable (often linked from a magazine’s “Submit” page), which lets writers track submission status and follow up without spreadsheets. While some writers still mail submissions, advice varies on whether to staple pages; the safer universal move is to follow the magazine’s instructions exactly. For writers submitting to multiple places, keeping your own record is still “general etiquette,” because once a story is accepted somewhere, other submissions must be withdrawn. Beyond logistics, the core quality baseline is straightforward: proofread thoroughly and submit the strongest version of the story you can.

A major avoidable mistake is skipping the submission guidelines. Many magazines run blind submissions, meaning names should not appear in the manuscript unless the guidelines request it. Writers should also use an industry-standard, legible font (Times New Roman, Arial, or Garamond are cited), and respect any formatting requirements like double-spacing. The transcript emphasizes that ignoring these details can make a submission look careless—even if the writing is strong.

Cover letters are treated as a simple, structured formality rather than a place to summarize the plot. The recommended contents are the word count, genre, title, and any notable contest placement (long list/short list), plus whether the story is under simultaneous consideration. Writers are cautioned against boasting about “stealth” or low-circulation publications (like on-campus magazines) as if they were widely read; the practical framing is to submit the story as unpublished if the audience is effectively limited, but don’t present it as a major credential. Personalization matters: use the magazine’s masthead name when possible, and keep the bio brief—often including location (e.g., “Vancouver”) when submitting to Canadian literary magazines that may be influenced by funding and representation requirements.

The transcript also lays out how contests differ from regular submissions: contests often come with higher fees but can pay thousands, while regular submissions typically have low or no reading fees and standard honoraria (sometimes as low as nothing, sometimes per-page rates). Simultaneous submissions are generally acceptable for regular submissions but usually not for contests.

Finally, rejection is reframed as a learning tool and a numbers game. Rejections arrive in tiers—from curt form letters to personalized notes that indicate the story reached later rounds. The more specific the feedback, the more likely the work fits that magazine’s taste, so writers should keep submitting there. Strategy is presented as patience with two workable approaches: “tiered” submissions (send to top targets first, then move down after rejections) or “rolling” submissions (cycle multiple stories through one or two magazines at a time to preserve revision options and keep contest eligibility flexible). The overall message: keep submitting, set a rejection goal, and don’t confuse rejection with lack of quality—magazines have limited space and decisions often hinge on fit for a particular issue at a particular time.